Developing and enhancing undergraduate
final-year projects and dissertations
A National Teaching Fellowship Scheme project publication
Mick Healey, Laura Lannin, Arran Stibbe and James Derounian
July 2013
Contents
Section
Page
Foreword by Professor Stephanie Marshall
3
The authors
4
Acknowledgements
5
Executive summary
6
1. The rationale for diversifying final-year projects and dissertations
2. Student as producer and the key dimensions of final-year projects and
dissertations
3. Characteristics of final-year projects and dissertations and alternative
possibilities
4. Preparation in earlier years of programme
5. Engagement with community groups and employers
6. Assessment
7. Supervising and advising
8. Celebrating and disseminating
9. Conclusions and recommendations
8
19
27
32
40
50
59
68
73
References
77
Appendix 1 - List of case studies by discipline
89
Comments by readers
93
2
Foreword by Professor Stephanie Marshall
Universities should treat learning as not yet wholly solved problems and hence always in research mode.
(Humboldt 1970, quoted by Elton 2005, 110)
This quote taken from Humboldt over 200 years ago at the University of Berlin’s founding emphasises his
commitment to the inter-relatedness of teaching and research, and is still apposite today. What is higher
education for, if it is not about assisting learners to make sense of the complexity of the world in which
they live? It follows that a curriculum which integrates the knowledge and learning students glean from
further studies, with engagement with local and global challenges and issues, better prepares students for
lifelong learning. And, at a time when ‘skills for employability’ is of growing concern, a more integrative
approach to the curriculum is being explored globally. This is where final-year projects, dissertations and
capstone projects are so important in assisting the process of engaging students in knowledge creation.
This book, which is the result of a National Teaching Fellowship Scheme (NTFS) project undertaken by
Mick Healey, Laura Lannin, Arran Stibbe and James Derounian from 2010 to 2012, explores how to
engage students in the production of knowledge. It is unique in that it draws on global case studies, and
presents a framework for assuring that students completing an undergraduate degree – irrespective of
the diversity of programme, institution or mode of study – are better equipped to make sense of, and
apply, their undergraduate learning through the teaching research nexus.
The book is rigorous, drawing upon the full range of recent literature. Through its case study approach,
with over 70 exemplars drawn from across the world, it will be of exceptional value to the reader. I
commend this excellent book to all higher education teachers grappling with the purpose, organisation,
facilitation and possible modes of ‘evidencing’ best practice in the delivery of learning.
Professor Stephanie Marshall
Deputy Chief Executive (Research and Policy)
Higher Education Academy
3
The authors
Mick Healey is a higher education consultant and researcher and emeritus professor at the University
of Gloucestershire, UK. He is also an honorary professor at the University of Queensland, an adjunct
professor at Macquarie University, Sydney, and a visiting professor at the University of South Wales. He
was one of the first people in the UK to be awarded a National Teaching Fellowship and to be made a
Principal Fellow of the Higher Education Academy. In 2013 he received a SEDA@20 Legacy Award for
Disciplinary Development. He is often asked to act as an advisor to projects, universities and national
governments on aspects of teaching and learning in higher education. Mick is an experienced presenter.
Since 1995 he has given approx. 500 educational workshops, seminars and conferences. He has written
and edited over 150 papers, chapters, books and guides. Further information is available from his website:
www.mickhealey.co.uk.
Laura Lannin is the higher education programme manager at the Museum of London. Prior to this she
worked as a research assistant on the ‘Rethinking final-year projects and dissertations’ project at the
University of Gloucestershire. She has also worked as a researcher for the Centre for Active Learning
and on several projects at the University, including the ‘Community flood archive’ and ‘Enhancement
through storytelling’ project.
Arran Stibbe is a reader in ecological linguistics at the University of Gloucestershire. He was awarded a
National Teaching Fellowship in 2009 and a fellowship of the Centre for Active Learning in 2008. He has
published widely in the areas of both discourse analysis and ecological education and was editor of The
handbook of sustainability literacy: Skills for a changing world, which brought together 50 educators to reflect
on the skills that students need to face the challenges of the 21st century. His latest book, Animals erased:
Discourse, ecology and reconnection with the natural world, was published in 2012.
James Derounian is a National Teaching Fellow and principal lecturer in community engagement and
governance at the University of Gloucestershire. James' teaching, action research and consultancy relate
to active and blended learning approaches, local governance, rural social issues and community
engagement. He is an experienced external examiner. James has undertaken consultancies for
international (Romanian Historic Monuments' Commission), national (Carnegie UK Trust) and local
(Oxfordshire Rural Community Council) organisations. He is particularly skilled at facilitating learning for
part-time, mature and distance learning students. James has been selected and trained by the Royal
Institute of Chartered Surveyors (2012) to undertake independent assessments of community-generated
neighbourhood plans across England. He publishes articles regularly for the Guardian newspaper on higher
education and localism www.guardian.co.uk/profile/james-derounian.
4
Acknowledgements
The project on which this publication is based was undertaken as part of the National Teaching
Fellowship Scheme (NTFS) project strand initiative funded by the Higher Education Funding Council for
England with matched funding from the University of Gloucestershire and managed by the Higher
Education Academy between 2010 and 2012 (Healey et al. 2012). The other team members were Susan
Bray, John Deane, Stephen Hill, Jim Keane and Claire Simmons. The Higher Education Academy kindly
agreed to make this book available on its website.
We are indebted to colleagues from around the world who provided us with details of their final-year
projects and dissertations, and members of our International Advisory Panel who helped us think through
the issues. We are particularly grateful to Alan Jenkins (Oxford Brookes), who accompanied us on our
journey from helping us formulate the initial idea for the project right through to providing a critical
commentary on the text of this publication.
We are also very grateful to Arshad Ahmad (Concordia, Canada), Janis Bailey (Griffith, Australia), Angela
Brew (Macquarie, Australia), Peter Felten (Elon, USA), Karen Gresty (Plymouth, UK), Didi Griffioen (VU
University Amsterdam, Netherlands), Andy Hagyard (Lincoln, UK), Stuart Hampton-Reeves (Central
Lancashire, UK), Ruth Healey (Chester, UK), Bettie Higgs (Cork, Ireland), Stephen Hill (Gloucestershire,
UK), Stephen Jackson (QAA, UK), Nicki Lee (Victoria, Australia), Martin Luck (Nottingham, UK), Kris
Mason O’Connor (Gloucestershire, UK), Kelly Matthews (Queensland, Australia), Mike Neary (Lincoln,
UK), Rachel Spronken-Smith (Otago, New Zealand), and Malcolm Todd (Leeds Metropolitan, UK), who
made helpful and constructive comments on a draft of this book.
5
Executive summary
Over the last decade, the use of projects and dissertations in university curricula … has been seen as
increasingly important (Marshall 2009, 150).
I cannot think of anything more unfair than … to treat all students as if they are the same, when they so
manifestly are not (Elton 2000, 1).
Final-year projects and dissertations (FYPD) undertaken by students at the end of their Bachelor degree
courses are a topic of current interest in many countries. It is timely to reassert the importance of FYPD
and to rethink their role in the curriculum as the context of higher education changes. For example, the
number of students in higher education has expanded, students are coming from a wider range of
backgrounds, and the challenges that humanity is facing in the 21st century are increasingly complex and
inter-disciplinary. In addition, the development of MOOCs (massive open online courses) could lead to
more of the content of degrees being delivered online, leaving universities to add value by focusing on
student-centred activities where face-to-face tuition is needed, such as FYPD. Similarly, in discussions
about providing more holistic learning experiences, the role of FYPD as the capstone of Bachelor degrees
is likely to be of growing significance as a key way of delivering programme-learning outcomes and
research-informed teaching.
Our argument is that all undergraduate students should undertake a FYPD, and while valuing the
traditional Bachelor dissertation, which in the UK is typically an 8-12,000 word independent piece of
disciplinary academic research, additional options should be available. These may differ in their
conception, function, organisation, location, and nature of outputs. With increasing student numbers,
widening diversity of motivations, and the growth of professional disciplines such as business, journalism,
nursing, engineering and education, traditional dissertations do not necessarily provide for all students
and employers’ requirements. Ways should be found for students in all disciplines, and from all
backgrounds, to have the opportunity to fulfil their potential through undertaking FYPD more closely
aligned to their needs and aspirations.
This book aims to identify innovative and creative ways of developing FYPD. It raises key issues about the
defining characteristics of higher education and how the final-year curriculum should exemplify these
through the design of FYPD. We illustrate our argument by drawing on over 70 case studies that we have
collected from a wide range of disciplines in both research- and teaching-intensive institutions from the
UK, Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Switzerland and the United States.
The book ends with a list of recommendations.
Although the project was carried out in the UK, this publication is relevant to rethinking the nature of
FYPD internationally, with approximately half the case studies coming from outside the UK. The primary
audience is academics responsible for designing FYPD, in particular dissertations and capstone projects;
the book should also be of general interest to supervisors of FYPD and academic leaders/managers
concerned with teaching and learning and curriculum development. It aims to help colleagues explore a
variety of ways in which their FYPD could be designed, delivered and assessed.
6
We conclude that both students and staff/faculty should be given choices in the kind of FYPD they
undertake/supervise and in the nature of the outputs assessed. This is, in our view, the best way to meet
the varied needs of increased numbers of students in higher education and the pressure on staff
resources to supervise them. This approach is likely to motivate a wider range of students than the onesize-fits-all mode, which characterises most FYPD, and hence increase the probability that more students
will experience transformational learning.
7
1. The rationale for diversifying final-year projects and
dissertations
New models of curriculum … should all … incorporate research-based study for undergraduates
(Ramsden 2008, 10-11).
Re-imagining capstone projects has implications for students, faculty, departments and institutions, but
greater diversity could enhance its relevance to students and employers, better aligning the student
experience with the academic interests and future career demands of the 21st-century graduate (Hill et al.
2011, 331).
Final-year projects and dissertations (FYPD) are a topic of interest in many countries. In the US, The
Boyer Commission (1998, 27) recommended that all undergraduate programmes should ‘culminate with a
capstone experience. The final semester should focus on a major project and utilise to the full the research
and communication skills learned in the previous years.’ In Australia, issues around capstone courses and
standards are topical, for example, several recent reports have advocated the benefits of capstones
(Bailey et al. 2012; Holdsworth et al. 2009). In Europe the reshaping of the Bachelor degree through the
Bologna Process, which is designed to ensure comparability in the standards and quality of higher
education qualifications across Europe, has stimulated a rethink about how and where to ensure a
research emphasis in the curriculum. The latter is encouraged by the statement from the Conference of
European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education (2009, 4) that ‘Higher education should be based at
all levels on state of the art research thus fostering innovation and creativity in society’; and the follow-up
conference in 2012 which stressed the ‘participation of students in research and development’ (Eurydice
2012, 52).
According to Marshall (2009, 151):
Projects and dissertations have always been viewed as an effective means of research training and
of encouraging a discovery approach to learning … [they] are also seen as an effective means of:
 diversifying assessment;
 addressing concern to promote skills and employability;
 empowering the learner;
 motivating students;
 promoting links between teaching and research;
 ‘talent spotting’, ie identifying potential research students/assistants.
In the course of this project we came across a dissertation assessment brief from 2011 which included
the instruction ‘Do not allow your typist or printer to impose their own ideas about presentation’.
Presumably the brief had not been modified much from the time of typewriters, a time when printers had
ideas rather than cartridges. We came across academics who felt that the dissertation, as the pinnacle of
learning and achievement, did not need development or enhancement. But we also came across staff and
faculty from a wide range of disciplines and countries who gave reasons why the role of final-year
projects and dissertations (FYPD) should be considered carefully in the light of changes in the world
around us. The following are some of the reasons:
8
 more students go to university now, and only a small fraction go on to have academic careers,
so universities need to help prepare students for the wide range of roles that they will play in
society;
 students from a greater diversity of backgrounds are entering higher education, and a wider
range of types of dissertation can help celebrate the range of talents, abilities and experiences
that students have;
 the nature of ‘research’ is changing, with a wider range of activities, such as first person
enquiry, action research in the workplace, knowledge transfer and production of artefacts now
counting as research;
 there is an increasing inter-disciplinary and real-world focus in education in recognition of the
complex nature of the issues facing humanity in the 21st century. For example, climate change
has political, social, economic, technological and ecological aspects, and different kinds of FYPD
could help prepare students for such issues (eg multidisciplinary, self-reflective FYPD teams
actively engaged in community-based projects);
 in turbulent times the fundamental issue of what higher education is for is being increasingly
questioned – is it to help graduates lead meaningful and satisfying lives, to transform society, to
increase economic growth, to contribute to knowledge, or to satisfy students as consumers?
As answers emerge, new forms of FYPD will be needed to help put a variety of visions into
reality.
It is also timely to reassert the importance of FYPD and to rethink their role in the curriculum for two
further reasons. Firstly, according to The New York Times, 2012 was ‘The year of the MOOC’ (massive
open online courses) (Papano 2012). Ahmad (2013) predicts that the disruptive force of MOOCs will
lead to more hybrid learning designs, with universities taking the best of the MOOCs to deliver the
content of large introductory classes and some advanced courses, leaving the universities to add value by
focusing on student-centred activities where face-to-face tuition is needed. Such a scenario could lead to
a rapid growth of the ‘inverted’ or ‘flipped classroom’ in which content is delivered in the form of, for
example, video and audio clips and electronic handouts, leaving the face-to-face contact time to focus on
discussion, problem solving and other forms of active learning (Lage et al. 2000; Bergman and Sams 2012).
FYPD give universities the opportunity to provide high quality student-centred learning involving
supervision and advice which may not easily be delivered by MOOCs and hence they could become an
even more significant feature in the curriculum.
Secondly, a number of universities are rethinking modularisation and the associated disaggregated
assessment strategies which are its consequence. Accordingly these universities are re-aggregating the
curriculum to provide a more holistic learning experience for students, the position of FYPD as a
capstone for degree programmes is becoming more important (Hill 2013). This is part of the growing
interest in assessing programme-level outcomes rather than just individual modules or courses (PASS
2012). Indeed, in a number of countries, such as Sweden, the quality of the FYPD is being used to assure
the standard of degrees; hence well-designed FYPD may contribute to quality assurance and accreditation
processes (Chapter 6). However, despite being regarded as an integral component of many
undergraduate degree programmes FYPD have attracted a limited amount of research (Greenbank et al.
2008).
It is important to point out that we did not come across any staff who felt that FYPD were valueless and
needed to be scrapped. Quite the contrary – the project has ended up as a celebration of not only
9
traditional forms of FYPD, but also a wide range of enhancements and innovations in practice that can
help FYPD to adapt to changing times.
It is challenging to undertake an international review of FYPD, not least because there is considerable
variability in the terminology used to describe final-year projects and dissertations (Table 1) and practices
vary by discipline and country (Allan 2011; Bailey et al. 2012; Healey and Jenkins 2009; Kiley et al. 2012;
Nicholson et al. 2010; Rowles et al. 2004). In this publication we use the term FYPD broadly to refer to
all the various ways in which students undertake research and inquiry projects in the final year of their
undergraduate or Bachelor degree courses. We make extensive use of case studies from a wide range of
disciplines, institutions and countries. For ease of referencing the case studies are referred to in the text
in the order they appear on the project website, where the sources on which they are based may also be
found (Appendix 1).
The changing role and experience of final-year projects and dissertations
FYPD vary in the role they play in different countries. For example, in the UK the honours project or
dissertation is undertaken by the majority of students and has, deservedly ‘a privileged place within many
degree programmes’ (Hemmings 2001, 41). This distinguishes the UK from higher education systems in
Australasia and Canada, where commonly only 10-20% of students undertake an honours project, as this
often involves an additional year of study; though many more experience capstone projects as part of
their undergraduate degrees. The traditional project or dissertation provides an excellent apprenticeship
for students wishing to undertake research degrees, but with increasing student numbers, the widening
range of motivations for studying higher education and the growth of professional disciplines, innovative
approaches to designing a wider range of FYPD also need to be considered (see Table 3 in Chapter 3).
In the context of the UK the traditional honours project or dissertation is under pressure because of the
resources required to support it, the lack of preparedness of some students to undertake it, and its lack
of perceived relevance to some courses and future careers (Booth and Harrington 2003; Price and
Feehily 2004). This has led some departments to stop offering the dissertation, but in our view this is a
case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater; there are alternative forms the dissertation may take
to make them relevant and other ways of addressing the resource (Chapter 7) and preparedness issues
(Chapter 4).
The FYPD is commonly based on the three/four-year full-time model of higher education rather than the
increasingly diverse provision, including part-time and work-based learning. Yet for many academics it
remains the ‘acid test’ for students, towards the end of their degree, to demonstrate independent work
on a major project, showing that they can think and work like a member of their discipline or profession.
As Todd et al. (2004, 336) note:
The ability to work independently is an important outcome of undergraduate study and the
dissertation is designed to allow learners to be more involved in decisions about the choice of
subject matter, learning methods, control over which aspects may be focused upon, pace,
sequence and content of their study - which are some of the key characteristics of independent
learning.
10
Table 1 Terminology
Term
Meaning
Dissertation
In the UK a ‘dissertation’ normally refers to an undergraduate honours project,
while in North America it usually refers to a doctoral level project. Whereas
the Americans use the term ‘project’ or ‘thesis’ to refer to research projects at
undergraduate level, in the UK the word ‘thesis’ is usually reserved for Masters
and doctoral level research projects. In this publication the UK use of the term
dissertation is used.
The great majority of students in the UK undertake an honours project for
their undergraduate or Bachelor degree, which usually counts for 20-40% of the
final-year credits. It is variable in the rest of Europe; while in Australasia and
Canada only a small proportion of students typically take an honours project. In
the USA some HE institutions have a separate honors program, generally
offered to the top percentile of students, that offers more challenging courses
or more individually directed research projects or seminars instead of the
standard curriculum. These students graduate ‘with honors’, but are awarded
the same Bachelor degree as other students.
The traditional honours dissertation in the UK, and some other European
countries, is an independent piece of research, typically 8-12,000 words long,
but those with lower credit ratings may be shorter (eg 5-6,000 words). In
Australasia and Canada an honours project usually involves a larger piece of
work undertaken as part of an additional year’s study. This publication explores
alternative forms of dissertation and final-year projects which might be offered
alongside or instead of the traditional form.
The term ‘capstone project’ is commonly used in North America and
Australasia for a project in the last year or semester of the degree programme
which provides opportunities for students to synthesise and apply their
knowledge and experiences from their whole programme. It helps them to
negotiate successfully the transition to the next stage of their career, whether
to the workplace or further study. Our interest is in those capstone projects where
undergraduate students undertake a significant amount of research and inquiry.
In this book FYPD refers to all of the above types of project which engage students in
research and inquiry at the end of their undergraduate or bachelor programme. They
include both traditional and alternative forms of the dissertation and honours project.
The key dimensions and characteristics of FYPD and some alternative
possibilities are discussed in Chapters 2 and 3.
Commonly five to eight modules or courses (according to their credit ratings)
are taken by full-time students in their final-year in the UK.
The term ‘assessment’ is used here in the UK sense of grading work or providing
feedback rather than the North American sense of evaluation of institutional
and programme effectiveness.
Credit ratings for FYPD are cited in several of the case studies. Confusingly
these vary between and within countries. In the UK a Bachelor Honours degree
involves 360 credits; in Australia, parts of Canada and the US a Bachelor degree
is commonly around 120 credits, while under the Bologna Accords in Europe a
Bachelor degree requires 180-240 credits. In the UK 15 credits = 7.5 European
credits = 4 credits in US. A clearer comparison is the proportion an FYPD
constitutes of a full-time final-year programme.
Honours project
Traditional
dissertation or
honours project
Capstone project
Final-year projects
and dissertations
(FYPD)
Module
Assessment
Degree credits
11
In recent years the proportion of undergraduates going on to take postgraduate research degrees has
fallen in many countries; hence other forms of FYPD may be more appropriate to meet their graduate
aspirations. As Brew (2007, 7) notes:
For the students who are the professionals of the future, developing the ability to investigate
problems, make judgments on the basis of sound evidence, take decisions on a rational basis, and
understand what they are doing and why is vital. Research and inquiry is not just for those who
choose to pursue an academic career. It is central to professional life in the 21st century.
While recognising the strengths of the traditional honours project, what are also needed are alternative
types that provide students with a forward-looking experience and equip them to thrive in an uncertain,
supercomplex world (Barnett 2000; 2004). Giving students a choice of alternative forms of FYPD is
important to ensure that the needs of all final-year students are met regardless of background, discipline,
institution or life goals.
The biosciences programme at Durham, a research-intensive university, represents a good example of
providing alternative forms of FYPD. Students may choose between a laboratory-based project;
developing a business plan for the formation of a biotechnology company to exploit an innovation
generated by biological research; or a school-based biosciences project (Case study 5.8).
Case study 5.8 Biosciences final-year project at Durham University, UK
Students have a choice of three different types of final-year project:
1.
Laboratory-based project
The laboratory-based project provides an opportunity to participate in the research being carried
out by staff in the school. Many students are able to work in the research laboratories, alongside
postgraduate and postdoctoral researchers, and all students have access to the full array of
research facilities in the school. The project currently entails over five weeks of full-time research,
and students are given a piece of work that can lead to concrete results over this period. Many
undergraduate projects have generated data that has subsequently been incorporated into
scientific papers, with the student as a named author. The project is assessed through a report,
written in the form of a mini-thesis, plus a short presentation.
2.
Biology enterprise
Biology enterprise (BE) is a project-orientated module, based on research in a commercial
context, with self-selecting groups of five or six students working together. The learning context
for BE follows the real-life scenario of the formation of a biotechnology spin-out company from an
academic biosciences research group. BE aims to introduce students to: key processes of business
start-up, specifically in the context of a spin-out of an innovation generated as a result of biological
research; key factors and considerations that influence the decision-making process of the
commercialisation of biotechnological innovation; the necessary skills, knowledge and resources
required to take the concept through to credible commercial propositions; the purpose of a
business plan and, using a self-generated idea, how to prepare and present a plan for a researchled biotechnology spin-off. A core component of BE is an in-depth desk study of a biological topic
to collate, review, critically appraise and present the scientific research evidence that underpins
the idea for the biotechnological product or process. The content of this module provides an
introduction to key business processes such as ideas generation; market research; protection of
12
intellectual property; raising finance, in addition to developing individuals' team working, project
planning, time management and transferrable skills.
3.
Biology into schools
For students who see their future in science education, or other communication-based activities
such as journalism, the Science into schools module provides an attractive option. As with the
other research project options, it is research-led, but in this case the research takes the form of a
systematic inquiry into the teaching and learning process. Students are required to prepare
materials for teaching science in secondary schools, and to interact with teachers and pupils. After
an initial training period, students spend at least four hours per week for 10 weeks in a local
school. They are expected to graduate from classroom observation, to teaching assistance, to an
opportunity to undertake whole class teaching. They will also devise a special biological sciences
project for the school, which they implement and assess. The module is assessed through a
journal of activities, reports, a presentation, and a review by the host teacher. This module
focusses on developing communication skills, as well as team working and interpersonal skills. This
module is only available to a limited number of students, determined by the number of
participating schools.
Flexibility in the conception, function, organisation, location, and nature of outputs of FYPD is required
not only to allow for diversity in student motivations, but also for discipline diversity. What counts as
research and inquiry varies significantly by discipline (Healey and Jenkins 2009; Jenkins et al. 2007). Thus,
for example, in art and design and media subjects there is much discussion about artistic practice as
research (Till 2013) and a wide range of ways of portraying the outcomes of research and inquiry are
acceptable, including practices such as photographs and photo-essays, videos, sound recordings, radio
broadcasts, scripts and story treatments, illustrations, sketches, computer graphics, websites, animations,
product designs and schematics, mixed-media project work, and group presentations. A range of forms of
written work such as essays, stories, poems (eg ‘creative writing’) diaries and reflective logs may also be
included. For example, in the Performing Arts degree at the University of Winchester students have a
choice of assessments, including 100% performance, workshops and performance, and a traditional
10,000-word dissertation (Case study 1.17).
Case study 1.17 Developing the reflective practitioner in performing arts at the
University of Winchester, UK
The BA (Hons) Performing Arts degree at the University concerns contemporary performance
practice. We place the notion of the student as 'reflective practitioner' at the heart of the
programme as a pedagogical and philosophical model. Performance-making and researchingthrough-performance are fundamental to the programme. Theory is explored through practice,
while practice is evaluated and contextualised through theory. Inter-disciplinarity and crossdisciplinarity are also at the core of the programme. … The final year project module aims to
develop a key transferable skill, which is promoted by the programme, namely fostering the
students' ability to recognise their own learning needs in relation to their particular strengths and
learning skills. Students develop an individually negotiated portfolio of work informed by current
debates in performing arts, specifically focusing upon preparing them to continue work at
postgraduate level or in a professional capacity. Various models are available to the students,
including 100% performance, workshops and performance, and a traditional 10,000-word
dissertation. In all cases the process must be underpinned by critical reflection.
Source: Extracts from Hellier-Tinoco and Cuming (2010, 18, 21)
13
Whether the institution is research-intensive or teaching-focused, choices as to the kind of FYPD they
undertake are important as students have different motivations and career aspirations. Hence we believe
that a more flexible but equally robust approach is required in the design and assessment of FYPD to
meet the needs of students from diverse subject areas and types of institution.
The honours project or dissertation is seen as a key way of linking research and teaching (Jenkins et al.
2003, 2007; Rowe and Okell 2009) and many students testify to the transformational learning effect of
their experience (Derounian 2011). Unfortunately this is not the experience of all students (Shadforth
and Harvey 2004). Ways should be found for students in all disciplines, from all backgrounds, to have the
opportunity to fulfil their potential through undertaking FYPD more closely aligned to their needs and
aspirations. The initial impetus behind the Research Informed Teaching Initiative in the UK was to
preserve the ‘gold-standard’ of honours projects and dissertations and to protect the international
competitiveness of universities, though when enacted it went well beyond the dissertation (Childs et al.
2010; Healey and Jenkins 2009). Now is the time to diversify the nature of the FYPD to include both
traditional research and a wider range of inquiry-based activities, with a strong emphasis on ensuring
consistency of standards across different forms of assessment (Hand and Clewes 2000; Pathirage et al.
2007; Tariq et al. 1998; Webster et al. 2000; Chapter 6). Alignment of learning outcomes with project
design and assessment is, of course, critical in the maintenance of quality and standards (Biggs and Tang
2011).
Diversifying final-year projects and dissertations
The focus of this book is on students undertaking research and inquiry projects in their final or senior
year, but exploring a range of different kinds of FYPD also raises issues about the nature of research in
different disciplinary and professional settings. This reflects discussions of what counts as research in
different disciplines in the UK research assessment exercises and the 2013-14 Research Excellence
Framework. Most performing arts, design and fashion FYPD have, over time, favoured the production of
performances or artefacts displayed at end-of-degree shows. Consultancy and science communication
projects are used, for example, in some biosciences courses (Luck 2008); while projects in professional
subjects may be linked to work (Greenwood 2007; Millwood et al. 2007). There is a growing interest in
the UK in the scholarship of engagement which draws on US experiences (Boyer 1996) and seeks to
engage students directly as part of their curriculum with community groups (Chapter 5). Connected to
this discipline variation is a debate about how the findings of FYPD can be more effectively disseminated
(Chapter 8). Some of these issues parallel discussions about redefining the doctorate (Park 2007; Patton,
2013) and taught postgraduate projects (Brown et al. 2012).
There is evidence that FYPD may have a significant impact on student learning. Using data from the
National Survey of Student Engagement in the US, half of the high impact activities that Kuh (2008)
identifies could involve FYPD - collaborative projects, undergraduate research, community-based learning,
internships, and capstone projects. This is supported by a study of two service learning capstone projects
in New Zealand. Using the Australasian Survey of Student Engagement the researchers found that student
engagement was enhanced by the course and the gain was highest among the previously least engaged
(O’Steen et al., 2011; Case study 4.16 in Chapter 5).
In a similar vein we are especially interested in projects that result in what Kegan (2000) calls
‘transformational learning’. He argues that this results in new ways of knowing, or what Mezirow (1991)
refers to as ‘new frames of reference’. Freire (1998) extends this and suggests that the prime purpose of
14
education is transformation of the individual and society. Undertaking FYPD facilitate students to move
towards the self-authorship or contextual knowledge stage of intellectual development, which Baxter
Magolda (2009) identified in a longitudinal study 25 years ago. She argues that:
Moving away from uncritical acceptance of knowledge to critically constructing one’s own
perspective is more complex than learning a skill set. It is a transformation of how we think – a
change in our assumptions about the certainty, source and limits of knowledge (Baxter Magolda
2006, 50).
This relates to the ‘student as producer’ and ‘student as scholar’ conceptual frameworks which are
discussed in the next chapter.
This book aims to assist course teams in their search for innovative solutions for different disciplines and
professions in designing and assessing FYPD. It builds on previous NTFS projects concerned with
undergraduate research in new UK universities (Childs et al. 2010) and the experience of students in
their final year (Webb 2011), as well as on the experiences of Centres for Excellence in Teaching and
Learning focused on inquiry-based learning (LTEA nd). These previous projects only refer to FYPD in
passing and none investigated the nature of innovative FYPD. Most of the ground-breaking forms of
dissertation found in the NTFS Assimilate project at Masters level (Brown et al. 2012) are matched by
those we have found at undergraduate level. Arguably the range and variety of innovative practices are
even greater at the Bachelor level.
Making explicit the benefits of various forms of projects and recording the skills that students gain are
important ways of linking FYPD to employability (Bolden et al. 2009, Gresty 2009). FYPD help develop
skills in research and analysis, but students do not always make the link between what they have done for
their project or dissertation and how they articulate this in letters of applications for jobs or their CV
(Todd et al. nd). Competency-based interviews often ask applicants to describe a situation that
demonstrates skills they have utilised; FYPD can provide appropriate examples. The experience of taking
FYPD can, moreover, improve the development of graduate attributes, while at the same time
encouraging research-mindedness (Gunn 2010; 2011).
Preparing students to move into the world beyond university is an underlying rationale for creating
transformational experiences for final-year projects and capstone courses in many places (eg Lee 2006;
Schermer and Gray 2012; Sill et al. 2009). In the US this is increasingly conceptualised as an occasion for
integrative learning and as an opportunity for independent learning in one's discipline or professional field.
Integrative learning is about making connections within a programme or major, between fields, across
curriculum and co-curriculum, and between academic knowledge and practice. Fostering students'
abilities to integrate learning is arguably, according to Huber et al. (2007) ‘one of the most important
goals and challenges of higher education’. Within the curriculum the capstone course is an intentional
place for integrative learning.
Capstone projects
Capstone projects are common in North America, where they are taken by two-thirds of Bachelor
students (Berrett 2013) and in Australasia, where some universities, such as Macquarie and Swinburne
University of Technology, require all students to take a capstone or are moving towards this (Lee 2013;
Macquarie University nd). Capstone projects usually refer to integrative final-year ventures which are
often focused on the transition into a profession or further study (Table 1; Nash and McArdle 2008) and
15
to the development of higher levels of intellectual development (Baxter Magolda 2009). Rowles et al.
(2004, 14) suggest that:
Capstone experiences should be a culminating set of personal, academic, and professional
experiences, and as such, the primary focus of capstone experiences should be on the synthesis,
integration, or application of previously acquired knowledge rather than on the acquisition of new
knowledge or skills.
However, the term capstone is used loosely and inconsistently (Bailey et al. 2012) and other terms, such
as senior thesis or seminar, are sometimes used (Jones et al. 2012). Our interest is in those capstone
courses in which students undertake research and inquiry projects, rather than those that are designed as
taught courses. Some universities, such as Claflin University, South Carolina, have a compulsory capstone
project. They encourage a wide range of formats depending on the major, including writing a
comprehensive paper, producing a play, performing a major recital, giving a major exhibition, producing a
television documentary, composing a musical, performing scientific research, or writing a novel (Case
study 3.15).
Case study 3.15 The undergraduate capstone project guidelines at Claflin University,
South Carolina, USA
Claflin University is a historically black university founded in 1869. In 2000-01, completion of
either a senior thesis or capstone project became a requirement for graduation for all Claflin
University undergraduate students. For honors students the required capstone is the honors
senior thesis. For non-honors students, each school designs appropriate discipline-based capstone
projects.
In 2003 a decision was made to incorporate a strategic goal of: ‘establishing a comprehensive
undergraduate research program across the campus’ into the university’s five-year plan. Since that
time, the university faculty agreed on the following definition of undergraduate research at the
university: … faculty mentored student participation in inquiry to create intellectual contributions for the
discipline of study. As their capstone project, honors students are required to produce a
substantive and original thesis under the guidance of a selected faculty advisor. Topics must be in
line with the student’s major. Intensive reading and utilisation of primary documents direct the
initial preparation for the research. This process begins in the first semester of the junior year and
continues through the senior year. The student may, for instance, write a comprehensive paper,
or he or she may produce a play, perform a major recital, give a major exhibition, produce a
television documentary, compose a musical, perform scientific research, or write a novel, etc. In
cases where the student chooses to do a project instead of a comprehensive paper, a written
component will be necessary to fulfil the thesis requirement.
The senior capstone project requirement for non-honors College students varies according to the
student’s major degree program. These variations accommodate discipline-specific learning
objectives in addition to the Claflin University institutional level learning objects associated with
the senior capstone project requirement itself. Projects range from juried performances, to
research proposals, to portfolios, but all carry with them a requirement for producing a technical
writing paper appropriate to the student’s programme of study. Many schools or departments
include an option for non-honors students to complete an undergraduate level thesis paper as the
senior capstone.
Source: Based on Claflin University (2012, 2, 3, 6, 33)
16
Rowles et al. (2004) distinguish three models of capstone courses common in the US:
 ‘mountaintop’ capstones: these are inter-disciplinary courses that cross majors and bring
together diverse groups of students (and potentially, staff/faculty);
 ‘magnet’ capstones: these are discipline (or major) specific; and
 ‘mandate’ capstones: courses mandated by an external constituency, such as a practitioner or
registration body.
An audit of capstone courses in business schools in Australia found that over half were magnet capstones;
and though the authors noted there were challenges introducing mountaintop capstones, they felt that
these were often outweighed by the benefits (Bailey et al. 2012).
Capstone projects, as with other FYPD, may be transformative for the students as many are in a
transitional phase from university to joining the ‘real’ world and have a need to deal with more complex
and uncertain problems (Barnett 2004; Brew 2006).
In the capstone course students disengage (ie separate) from the undergraduate status and
existential condition and reemerge (ie incorporate) as graduates prepared to assess critically and
act responsibly in civil society. Thus, the capstone course provides the liminal threshold at which
students change their status (Durel 1993, 223).
Recent research examining capstone courses at four American liberal arts colleges, where they are
compulsory for all students, found a powerful effect on writing, oral-presentation, and critical-thinking
skills. However, the students were weaker in integrating knowledge across courses and disciplines
(Schermer and Gray, 2012).
Book structure
The next chapter explores the ‘student as producer’ conceptual framework which underpins this book
and maps out how FYPD may vary. This leads us to emphasise the different dimensions of FYPD rather
than attempt to come up with a single overarching definition. Having highlighted the variety of FYPD the
following chapter explores the common characteristics and some of the alternative possibilities. This is
followed by five chapters, each of which analyses a different theme about enhancing FYPD:





preparation in earlier years of programme;
engaging community groups and employers;
assessment;
supervising and advising; and
celebrating and disseminating.
The final chapter discusses the conclusions and implications of this study. The chapters are illustrated by
brief case studies covering a wide range of disciplines, institutional types and countries. Many may be
adapted for use by different programmes, subjects, and cultures. Nearly all the 70+ case studies we
collected are of FYPD at Bachelor level (Appendix 1). However, we include a few examples at Masters
level and a few from earlier years of degree programmes, where we think the practice is potentially
transferable with adjustment to the final year of the Bachelor degree.
17
The key challenge for each programme is to think creatively about the variety of ways in which FYPD
may be designed to reflect the defining characteristics of higher education, but still be sensitive to the
context of the nature of the subject and the culture of the department and institution in which it is
taught. Importantly, as Gunn (2011) has noted below in relation to research-teaching linkage,
introduction of innovations are more effective when embedded in the culture of disciplines and
institutions than when imposed:
Ways of thinking, subject-appropriate learning activities, and the cultural context of disciplinespecific knowledge generation and dissemination are variable enough to mean that notions of
research-teaching linkages are most effective when they emerge from within the disciplines in institutions,
whether these are configured research-intensive or not, rather than when introduced as part of a widescale, externally imposed, centralising educational agenda (Gunn 2011, 2; emphasis in original).
Her argument also applies to the design and development of effective FYPD.
18
2. Student as producer and the key dimensions of final-year
projects and dissertations
Student as producer works on more than one level: as a curriculum development project, as a model of
institutional change and as a social movement concerned with reinventing the 'idea of the university'
(Neary 2012).
In undertaking this study we have drawn on literature from a wide range of sources covering
interconnected issues, including linking research and teaching, undergraduate research and inquiry,
community and work-based initiatives, capstone projects and integrative learning, independent, creative
and transformational learning, equity and widening participation issues, graduate attributes and standards,
assessment of individual and group projects, and disseminating and celebrating undergraduate work. The
overarching framework that we have found particularly helpful in understanding final-year projects and
dissertations (FYPD) is the wider national and international debate which concerns student as producer.
This leads us to propose that it is important to highlight the variety of forms that FYPD may take and,
rather than trying to come up with a single definition of the phenomena, we suggest that it is better to
identify the various dimensions of FYPD and hence to celebrate this diverse range. Further references
about FYPD may be found in Healey (2013).
Student as producer
The idea of students being active learners, in which they are the producers of their own knowledge
rather than just consumers of other people’s knowledge, has been around for a long time. Confucius
(c450 BC) is often quoted: ‘Tell me, and I will forget. Show me, and I may remember. Involve me, and I
will understand.’ Gibbs (1998, 9) expressed this in a different way: ‘It is not enough just to do, and neither
is it enough just to think. Nor is it enough simply to do and think. Learning from experience must involve
linking the doing and the thinking.’
One of the most effective ways of linking the doing and the thinking is engaging students in inquiry-based
learning (Healey et al. 2010; Lee 2012). According to the UK’s Centre for Active Learning (CeAL), active
learning ‘focuses on inquiry in the field, studio, laboratory and classroom, using real sites, communityrelated and employer linked activities’ (Healey et al. 2005). More than simply ‘learning by doing’, this
approach enables students to construct theoretical understanding through reflection on their activities.
Healey (2005a, 183), moreover, suggests that ‘Undergraduate students are likely to gain most benefit
from research in terms of depth of learning and understanding when they are involved actively,
particularly through various forms of inquiry-based learning.’ This view is not a new one. Wilhelm von
Humboldt recommended at the founding of the University of Berlin in 1810 (as quoted in the Foreword
to this book) that ‘Universities should treat learning as not yet wholly solved problems and hence always
in research mode’ (Humboldt 1970, quoted by Elton 2005, 110). These arguments led Healey and Jenkins
(2009, 3) to propose that:
All undergraduate students in all higher education institutions should experience learning through,
and about, research and inquiry. In undergraduate research, students learn and are assessed in ways
that come as close as possible to the experience of academic staff carrying out their disciplinary
research.
19
FYPD are perhaps the most common examples of engaging undergraduate students directly in research
and inquiry within the curriculum, though they are but just one example of research-based learning
(Healey 2005b). A summary of best practices which support and sustain effective undergraduate research
has recently been produced by the Council on Undergraduate Research (Hensel 2012).
The term ‘student as producer’ has been popularised by Neary, first as the Director of the Reinvention
Centre at the University of Warwick (2010) and subsequently as Dean of Teaching and Learning at the
University of Lincoln (Neary and Hagyard 2010). He sees the student as producer as part of a needed
rearrangement of higher education in which undergraduates working ‘in collaboration with academics to
create work of social importance that is full of academic content and value’ (Neary with Winn 2009, 193).
The University of Lincoln (nd) has identified eight key features of the student as producer concept:








Discovery: Student as producer;
Technology in teaching: Digital scholarship;
Space and spatiality: Learning landscapes in higher education;
Assessment: Active learners in communities of practice;
Research and evaluation: Scholarship of teaching and learning;
Student voice: Diversity, difference and dissensus;
Support for research-based learning through expert engagement with information resources;
Creating the future: Employability, enterprise, beyond employability, postgraduate.
A variant on student as producer is ‘student as scholar’, though it is more based on a liberal arts
conception of higher education. It is a concept used at Miami University and recently taken up by the
University of Prince Edward Island (Hodge et al. 2007, 2011; University of Prince Edward Island 2008).
Hodge et al. (2007, 1) propose that:
Undergraduate research should, in fact, be at the centre of the undergraduate experience, that
undergraduate education should adopt the ‘Student as Scholar’ Model throughout the curriculum,
where scholar is conceived in terms of an attitude, an intellectual posture, and a frame of mind.
FYPD moreover provide opportunities for staff/faculty to link their research interests directly with their
teaching. They extend the possibilities for collaborative research dissemination and reflect a nexus that
makes research and teaching excellence inseparable (Ashrad 2013). There are many examples of FYPD
leading to co-publication of the findings by students and their supervisors. Both the student as producer
and student as scholar concepts clearly go beyond the FYPD and encourage change across the institution.
Where such changes are first introduced to the form of the FYPD, the offer of alternative forms can
stimulate change elsewhere, as there is a need to prepare students for the range of different types of
FYPD on offer.
FYPD give students a significant opportunity to demonstrate their competencies as student producers or
scholars. Another way of expressing these competencies is in terms of graduate attributes, which are a
description of the generic qualities and skills that students are meant to possess on graduation (Barrie
2004). FYPD contribute to employability by helping deliver many of the graduate attributes emphasised
by employers. Land (2013) suggests that the attributes associated with engaging undergraduate students
in research and inquiry projects include:
20











critical understanding;
awareness of the provisional nature of knowledge;
how knowledge is created, advanced and renewed;
the effective communication and dissemination of findings;
an ability to analyse problems and issues and to formulate, evaluate and apply evidence-based
solutions and arguments;
an ability to apply a systematic and critical assessment of complex problems and issues;
an ability to deploy appropriate techniques of analysis and inquiry;
familiarity with advanced techniques and skills;
inventiveness and creativity in formulating, evaluating and applying evidence-based solutions and
arguments;
effective project management of time, resources, operations and information;
an understanding of the need for a high level of ethical, social, cultural, environmental and
wider professional conduct.
Some supporting evidence of the importance of skills development comes from a recent study by
Malcolm (2012, 572) of staff and student perceptions of undertaking the honours dissertation in business
and management. She found that both staff and students emphasised ‘the primacy of research process
over outcome, and … the primarily personal value of learning and achievement within that process’.
Key dimensions of final-year projects and dissertations
The form that FYPD take may vary along five key dimensions - conception, function, organisation,
location, and nature of outputs.
Conception
Traditional projects and dissertations are usually independently undertaken academic research projects
with a degree of choice being exercised by the student as to the topic. In science, technology, engineering
and mathematics these may be chosen from an approved list which staff/faculty are willing to supervise
and can be supported by existing laboratory resources. An alternative is to engage students in
consultancy projects. This is common in many business, engineering and ICT programmes. For example,
in Interactive Media Studies at Miami University, Ohio, students work in groups of up to 20 on real client
consultancy projects, such as redesigning their website (Case study 3.6 in Chapter 5). In other institutions
projects may be closely linked to the research interests of staff/faculty. For example, in Criminal Justice at
Australian National University, students participate in a research project based on current research being
conducted by members of the Faculty of Law, the Australian Institute of Criminology and Research
School of Social Science (Case study 2.3).
At Newcastle University, UK, students were involved in designing the Independent Study
dissertation module for Combined Honours (Case study 3.11). Assessment in the module follows
a path from formative to summative types of assessment. Both outputs and processes are
assessed with the latter determined through a final reflective interview. An element of peer
assessment is also used and peer collaboration is encouraged.
Function
Most dissertations emphasise the in-depth analysis of a problem or issue; whereas many capstone
projects stress the synthesis of ideas and material covered earlier in the syllabus. For example, the
21
Exploring Contemporary Literature capstone module at Oxford Brookes University is compulsory for
students studying English (Case study 1.13). The module encourages students in their final-year of study
to reflect upon their accumulated reading experiences and to explore and implement their critical
vocabularies by examining a number of contemporary writings. One of the principal aims is to get
students to relate the material that is discussed in class back to other texts and cultural forms that they
have encountered during their degree.
Other capstone projects, particularly in the professional disciplines, aim to prepare students for the
transition into professional life, as do some of the consultancy projects mentioned above. For example,
the Department of Engineering and Technology at Western Carolina University has implemented a core
of five engineering project-based learning courses focused on the development of new products and
processes culminating in a senior capstone (Case study 5.14). The department has partnered with The
Centre for Rapid Product Realisation in delivering and administering the project-based learning and
capstone courses. Both equipment and staff are shared in a collaborative effort to meet the needs of both
industry and students. The capstone projects cover medical devices and testing equipment, manufacturing
products and processes, military and tactical capability, solar collectors and control devices, and sports
equipment redesign. The joint collaborative partnership has produced well over 100 industry related
products/processes with several resulting in patent applications.
Organisation
In most traditional dissertations students work independently. However, in many projects group work is
used, partly in response to increasing student numbers, but also to give them experience of team working
which is common in many jobs and in some conceptions of research in science and engineering. For
example, final-year student primary school trainee teachers at the University of Chichester have the
opportunity to develop skills and confidence in creative problem-solving in their professional world (Case
study 4.4 in Chapter 7). Students work in small self-selected teams of around three to five students. They
address real-world problems over realistic timescales and, by the end of their projects, provide authentic
resources for external clients, typically schools or non-governmental organisations (NGOs) such as
museums or environmental education centres.
One benefit of working in teams is that where the group functions effectively, better quality work is often
obtained than where students work individually. In Case study 4.12 (Chapter 6) it is related how the
average mark for the Issues in Environmental Geography module based on group projects was
consistently 3-5 percentage points higher than the average for other final-year modules in geography. The
group mark was redistributed among the team members on the basis of self and peer assessment of the
quality and effectiveness of their contribution to five project processes – ideas and suggestions;
leadership, group organisation and support, minute taking; data collection/collation/analysis; report
writing, production and editing; and preparing/giving verbal presentation (Healey and Addis 2004).
Location
Most FYPD are campus-based, though some supervision may take place through technology enhanced
communication (Heinze and Heinze 2009). To make the experience more authentic a growing number of
programmes are exploring ways of engaging their students in community and work-based projects.
Work-based projects are relatively common in the professional disciplines, but we also came across
innovative examples elsewhere. At Sheffield Hallam University, for example, they have adopted this
model in a module in the humanities which runs across two semesters (Case study 1.9 in Chapter 5).
Recent student projects include: writing a handbook for volunteers working with dementia sufferers in
22
residential homes; operating as mentors in secondary schools; writing for an in-house film magazine; and
managing external relationships with the Showroom Arts Cinema.
Community-based projects are growing in importance in the UK, but they have not yet reached the
popularity they enjoy in North America, where they form part of the service learning initiatives found in
most universities. At Portland State they have gone a stage further, during the final year each
undergraduate is required to participate in a senior capstone community-based learning experience (Case
study 3.1 in Chapter 5). Each student works with a team of students and faculty. Each senior capstone
results in some form of summation, closing project, or final product that represents closure for the
student’s higher education experience.
Nature of outputs
The traditional output of the dissertation in the UK in many disciplines is an independent project or
thesis with the length dependent on the credit rating (Nicholson et al. 2010). For example, the guidelines
for the School of History, Welsh History and Archaeology, Bangor University (2012) state:
A dissertation is a research project (10–12,000 words in length not including footnotes and
bibliography) on an approved subject of the student’s own choice, organised and researched
independently by the author, though under the general supervision of a member of staff. The
dissertation should contain an element of originality (in the sources used and/or in their analysis)
and should include primary material. … The dissertation is 40 credits and comprises one third of
your marks in the final year.
Although other forms of output are common in FYPD in art, media and design subjects (eg Case study
1.17 in Chapter 1), they are rarer in most other disciplines. Several universities are investing in digital
humanities centres and collaborative research programmes that can support students who want to work
on non-traditional projects and dissertations. There is clear evidence of this at doctoral level in the States
(Patton, 2013), but it is also apparent at undergraduate level. For example, at New York University’s
archive and public history programme they have developed some creative alternatives to the traditional
written thesis including oral histories, documentaries, and exhibitions (Case study 1.19). Nigel Thrift
(2013) has recently argued that previously relatively distinct domains such as writing, drawing, painting,
sculpture, music, or performance ‘are changing as a result of digital production and distribution. Over the
last few years, each art form has begun to bleed into the others’. He goes on to predict that multimedia
presentations of academic work will soon become the norm. If this happens the format of many FYPD
may be very different in a few years’ time.
Case study 1.19 Engaging students in digital humanities in an archives and public
history curriculum at New York University, US
‘Traditionally we required a written thesis, 35 pages in length. We modified the requirements to
allow for digital projects, as well as other forms of archives and public history activities, such as
exhibition designs, oral history projects, online documentary editions, and walking tours. Students
have already begun to take advantage of the opportunities, and some have built extremely creative
undertakings. An example is an historical blog, First Hundred Days
(http://www.aphdigital.org/projects/first hundreddays/), created by two students around the theme
of the first hundred days of the Franklin Roosevelt administration. They invented several historical
characters, embedded documents and media from the period into the site, and created lesson
23
plans that secondary school teachers might use to incorporate the site into the classroom’ (Wosh
et al. 2012, 90-91).
At Sheffield Hallam they allow students on the MSc database professional dissertation to submit either a
traditional report, or a portfolio of artefacts (Case study 5.15 in Chapter 6). In order to maintain clear
fairness between the two approaches they share four equally weighted marking criteria - knowledge of
the domain; justification of the approach; description of the research and discussion of the outcomes; and
quality of the report and presentation of the argument. Typically the portfolio is delivered as a website,
allowing the inclusion of hyperlinks to media of different types.
Undergraduate research conferences and journals are growing in popularity as means of disseminating the
outputs from students’ projects (Healey and Jenkins 2009; Chapter 8). For example, final-year tourism
students at the Universities of Lincoln and Wolverhampton participate together in a live virtual
conference, as part of their final level assessment (Case study 2.2). Over a one-week period students
from the two campuses can come together at times of their choosing to participate in a joint effort to
disseminate research findings and engage in dialogue about their research. Students submit a full
conference paper, but it is only a summary discussion paper that appears on the conference website. Each
student is also required to post a comment on another conference paper, in true conference dialogue
tradition.
Involving students in public engagement is another way in which FYPD outputs may be disseminated.
Public engagement, as the UK National Co-ordinating Centre for Public Engagement (2012) comments:
describes the myriad of ways in which the activity and benefits of higher education and research
can be shared with the public. Engagement is by definition a two-way process, involving
interaction and listening, with the goal of generating mutual benefit.
For example, Bath University has on optional module for third- and fourth-year mathematics students, in
which they undertake a project designed to enhance and broaden public understanding of mathematics,
with a particular emphasis on working with local schools (Case study 5.7). The project provides
mathematics students with the opportunity to demonstrate competency with these skills and to evaluate
their ability, while increasing student interest in teaching careers.
Drawing on these differences in conception, function, organisation, location, and the nature of the
outputs, Table 2 summarises the dimensions of FYPD in a slightly different format. By mapping the key
dimensions in this way, rather than trying to come up with a single definition of a FYPD, we celebrate the
diversity of forms they may take. These dimensions can be viewed as continua. Table 2 was inspired by a
related attempt to map the variety of forms that undergraduate research may take (Beckman and Hensel
2009).
One way to address a variety of dimensions is to provide students with a choice as to the form of
dissertation they undertake, as we saw in the biosciences and performing arts case studies and at Claflin
University in Chapter 1. A further example of offering a range of assessment options is provided by the
Architecture, Design and the Built Environment degree at Nottingham Trent University. This approach
empowers students and enables them to take ownership of their FYPD and the direction it takes (Case
study 1.1). Further examples of alternative assessments and discussion of assuring quality standards are
given in Chapter 6.
24
Table 2 Dimensions of final-year projects and dissertations: A summary
Ranging from:
To:
Campus-based
Community or work-based
Undertaken at the university
Distance learning
Research career preparation
Preparation for a range of possible careers
Student learning centred
Outcome product centred
Discipline-based
Multi- or inter-disciplinary
Student initiated
Teacher/supervisor initiated
Individual work
Group work
Self-contained
Part of a larger project
Completed within the course
Builds on and revisits work of previous cohort
Original to the student
Original to the discipline
University audience
Professional/public audience
Emphasising in-depth analysis
Emphasising synthesis of knowledge/skills
Assessed by academics
Assessed by peers/professionals
Individual supervision
Group/peer supervisions
Case study 1.1 Giving students alternative assessment options for undertaking a
product design project at Nottingham Trent University, UK
The course offers several possible routes. Assessment is based on a learning contract negotiated
and agreed between the tutors and student. This contract stipulates the content of work, enabling
students to complete one of the following options:

Option 1: a 10,000-word dissertation and students produce a poster that summarises their
work;

Option 2: a 5,000-word conference paper with a supporting presentation delivered to
peers and tutors;

Option 3: a conceptual project with a 5,000-word critical justification. As well as a written
outcome students are required to produce illustrations or simulations.
Prior to students undertaking their chosen assignment, there is a three week intensive period
when students complete a learning contract. The contract identifies what option the student will
complete, what they hope to learn and how that learning will be demonstrated. The module
involves students using a wide range of primary and secondary research skills. Throughout the
year, the direct contact students have with tutors is mainly limited to group or sometimes
individual tutorials, where the tutor acts as a ‘consultant’, advising on their proposals, work in
25
progress, what knowledge or skills should be developed, how to tackle certain issues and who
students should approach for further information. Occasionally there will be content common to
all students and this will be delivered through lectures, for example, covering approaches to
research. There are also opportunities for students to present their work in progress to a panel
of tutors and peers, to obtain feedback.
Mapping the range of dimensions of FYPD emphasises the variety of forms that they may take, but there
are also important common features that characterise FYPD and these are considered in the next
chapter.
26
3. Characteristics of final-year projects and dissertations
and alternative possibilities
All degree programmes will include a major research project, dissertation or equivalent (at undergraduate
level typically 40 credits [ie one third of final year] where students are able to demonstrate the
development of their own research and independent study skills, as well as their expertise in their chosen
field of study. This major research project will provide a 'capstone' to their Durham education that allows
students to demonstrate their ability as independent learners and researchers (Durham University nd).
The capstone group project is a mandatory two-term, four-credit course [ie 12% of final year in Quebec
Province] required for graduation. ‘Everyone in their fourth and final year of an undergraduate engineering
degree is required to work on a capstone design project in a team, bringing together all they have learned
throughout their years of study,’ says Maureen Thuringer, administrator of the department (Concordia
University 2012).
Final-year projects and dissertations (FYPD) represent an important opportunity for students to use their
own initiative to select a topic, methodology, writing style, way of working and presentation format that
aligns with their interests, personal and career goals, discipline and course requirements, and the changing
world around them. To encourage students to use their initiative, course guides often give minimal
direction about the range of possible forms a FYPD can take. For some students, however, this lack of
prescription can actually reduce their choices since they automatically assume that what is required is a
formal piece of writing that echoes the style and approach of their discipline’s textbooks and journal
articles. To give students genuine choice in tailoring what they produce to their own specific abilities,
interests and goals, one approach is to be explicit about which aspects of a FYPD are ‘essential’ and what
possibilities and opportunities are available. The essential components, such as being an extended piece of
work, research-based and underpinned by literature, are the features or characteristics that make it a
FYPD. There are, however, many different forms that a FYPD can take while still exhibiting such core
characteristics, as our project found in case studies demonstrating a wide range of innovative practice
across higher education.
Our suggestion for FYPD guides is that they include both a list of essential features that need to be part
of any dissertation, as well as an open-ended set of possible shapes and forms that their FYPD can take
so long as the essential features are present and learning outcomes met. An example of a guide which
follows this format is given in Case study 1.12 (Chapter 4). Clearly, what is considered essential and what
range of possibilities are available to students will vary according to institution, subject area and course,
but the list of key characteristics and alternative possibilities offers some ideas for consideration (Tables 3
and 4). The suggestions are intended to be expansive rather than restrictive – there are far more
possibilities for dissertations than we can describe here.
The list in Table 3 is an attempt to characterise a FYPD; that is, to describe the essential features or core
characteristics that distinguish FYPD from other types of work. As with all characterisations, not every
FYPD can be expected to exhibit all of the characteristics; some are generally applicable, but others are
more relevant to particular disciplines and some are aspirational rather than being a strict requirement.
We have validated the ten characteristics through extensive consultation in 2011-12 with colleagues and
students in the UK and abroad. The intention, though, is for educators to pick, choose, adapt and add to
27
this list according to their specific discipline, institution and educational goals. Whatever form a project
or piece of work takes, and whether undertaken on campus, in the workplace or community,
characteristics such as those in Table 3 make it a FYPD.
Table 3 Characteristics of final-year projects and dissertations
1.
It should be an extended piece of work
This means that the dissertation or project tackles a central question or issue in depth which the
students take ownership of. All sections of the FYPD relate to the same issue rather than being a
collection of unrelated essays. The size depends on the contribution it makes to the final-year
marks eg 10%, 25%, 40% or, in the case of honours years in Australasia and Canada, 50% or more.
2.
It should be research or inquiry-based
There are a great variety of approaches to research, but central to these is a desire to find out
something significant about ourselves, our society, our culture, our environment or other aspects
of our world. Research can be qualitative, quantitative, laboratory or design-based, artistic,
ethnographic, participative, action research, research ‘on’, ‘for’ or ‘with’ people, first person
inquiry, or one of many other scholarly approaches.
3.
It should be relevant to a discipline or take an inter-disciplinary approach
The dissertation needs to draw from the disciplinary and inter-disciplinary knowledge and skills
and literature that students have gained during their degree, regardless of where the research
takes place, eg work or community-based research.
4.
It should be underpinned by a range of relevant sources
Sources that inform dissertations and projects include textbooks, journal articles, surveys,
interviews, experiments, secondary data, websites, blogs, tweets, wikis, practice reports and
direct personal experience. What is appropriate depends on the type of FYPD and the purposes
that the source is being used for. It should be recognised that all sources have strengths and
limitations, and reflection on the limitations and validity of the sources used is part of the process.
5.
It should be contextualised and show recognition of the provisional nature of
knowledge
FYPD need to be contextualised through reference to the larger disciplinary and real-world
contexts to which it is contributing. They should recognise that knowledge is uncertain,
provisional, and may be contested.
6.
It should incorporate an element of critical thinking, challenge and evaluation
The authors of FYPD should take a questioning attitude towards the sources used, the discipline,
the data, and/or the social and cultural context, examining, problematising and critiquing these as
appropriate. The best FYPD challenge and stretch their authors and move them beyond their
comfort zone helping them to discover new things about themselves and their capacities.
28
7.
It should be clear what it is contributing
A key part of a FYPD is its contribution to the field being investigated. For some disciplines, it is
important that dissertations go beyond stringing facts together and demonstrate at least some
elements of originality, innovation or creativity, though these are more likely to be the
characteristics of a very good piece of work rather than a minimum threshold judgement. The
originality could, for example, come from the application of a theoretical framework to new data,
the critical evaluation of arguments surrounding a controversial issue, bringing together of
information from multiple sources that have not been collated in that way before, or applying
theory to real-life issues. It is also important that the experiences of undertaking FYPD contribute
to the personal fulfillment of the students.
8.
It should have a clearly defined and justified methodology
FYPD should be based on a systematic and rigorous methodology, with clear explanation of how
application of the methodology can achieve the purposes and goals of the dissertation. It should
give the opportunity for students to demonstrate the understanding and skills that they have
developed during their degree programme. Furthermore it should show an awareness and
understanding of appropriate ethical issues in undertaking the research.
9.
It should build up to its conclusions and where appropriate have an element of
reflective commentary, including recommendations
FYPD should reach a coherent set of conclusions which relate to both the particular topic and the
research process. A variety of ideas should be considered, leading up to reasoned conclusions and
recommendations, eg for future research or policy or practice. In some cases, critical evaluation
can extend to reflection on the personal interests and goals of the researcher and how they
influence the research process. Many disciplines emphasise the importance of the author
presenting evidence-based and argued opinions.
10.
It should communicate the research outcomes appropriately and effectively
FYPD should be presented in ways which most clearly and effectively communicate the ideas to
the intended audience. For some dissertations and projects, there may be multiple intended
audiences, for example, a research section which is aimed at an academic audience and a report
based on the research aimed at policymakers. Most FYPD will incorporate an extended piece of
academic writing while some may also include other forms of writing or other media, such as a
report, conference presentation, website, or digital story.
So long as FYPD demonstrate a set of ‘essential’ features, such as those described in the previous section,
there are a wide range of possibilities for the shape and form that they can take. The examples in Table 4
are based on the cases studies of innovative practice in FYPD, listed in Appendix 1, and give an idea of
the range of possibilities available. In some cases they may be offered in addition to the traditional
dissertation or project.
29
Table 4 Alternative possibilities for final-year projects and dissertations
Common features Alternative possibilities
Individual work
Teamwork and group-work at some stage in the process; from workshops, miniconferences and peer evaluation to entirely collaborative projects. Case study 1.4 is
an example of a teamwork project (Chapter 5).
The output is a
The output consists of a research report as well as a product or artefact that has
research report
been created through practical application of the research findings. Students in
Music at Oxford Brookes can include a CD, tape or video of music which
accompanies their written dissertation (Case study 1.14).
Disciplinary focus
Inter-disciplinary and/or practice focused, where the dissertation can link to career
and/or citizenship agendas. Case study 3.5 is an example of an inter-disciplinary
approach (Chapter 8).
Detached
Engagement and intervention in the real world and ‘live’ issues; personal reflection.
observation
In Case study 3.1 students undertake a compulsory community-based capstone
project (Chapter 5).
Use of scholarly
Using scholarly literature, but also drawing on a wider range of practice and other
literature
sources; eg high quality new media sources or oral testimony. Case study 1.3
demonstrates using a scholarly approach to develop a visual artefact (Chapter 6).
Consideration of the Deeper consideration of the ethics of the research in terms of the potential
ethics of the
benefits or detriments to society arising from the type of research conducted. Case
research process in
study 1.9 includes reflection on ethical issues (Chapter 5).
terms of not
harming subjects
Emphasising in-depth Emphasising the integration of analytical skills with other capabilities. In Case study
analysis
5.6 students develop applied research skills in a real-world context (Chapter 5).
Writing style
Appreciation of the wide range of scholarly writing that takes place in a subject
derived from subject area, including creative approaches. Using a mixture of writing styles; for example, a
textbooks and
research section written in an academic style and an artefact produced in a
journal articles
business or public-facing style for a target audience. Case study 1.12 describes a
range of creative scholarly writing styles in which dissertations could be written
(Chapter 4).
A written and bound A written thesis for the main part of the dissertation, together with one or more
thesis (c.8-12,000
artefacts derived from the research such as: project reports, reflective writing,
words dependent on conference presentations, business plans, software packages or visual artefacts such
credit rating)
as DVD documentaries, sculptures or websites. In Case study 4.7 students write
for a undergraduate research journal (Chapter 8).
Self-contained and
Part of a larger project. Case study 5.18 inherits and builds on work from a
completed
previous cohort of students (Chapter 4).
Campus-based
Work-based or community-based research and consultancy projects (Chapter 5).
Primarily designed as Aimed at students’ preferred career, whether as an academic researcher or a wide
a preparation for
range of other possible careers, agendas and priorities. Case study 5.1 prepares
postgraduate study
students for a career in ICT (Chapter 5).
Reproduction of the Creative extension of the discipline, or combining coverage into an intertraditions of the
disciplinary project. Case study 3.7 shows how an inter-disciplinary approach can
discipline
achieve a tangible useful output (Chapter 6).
Individual
Group and/or peer advice and support. Case study 4.4 is a group-based project,
supervision
where only one member of the team is required to be at the weekly meeting, giving
responsibility to students to divide up tasks and communicate information
effectively to other group members (Chapter 7).
Assessed by
Assessed by peers or practitioners in addition to academics. In Case study 2.4, 35%
academics
of the assessment is marked by the client (Chapter 5).
30
Whatever form the FYPD take their effectiveness depends on the quality of the design and the process of
implementation. It is important here to take account of the various stakeholders. An analysis of the
perceptions of what students, staff and academic institutions, employers, society and community groups
want from FYPD is included in the final project report (Healey et al. 2012). The importance of taking
account of the views of range of stakeholders is well expressed by Todd and Magleby (2005, 203) in the
case of engineering education:
One of the principal objectives of engineering education is to prepare graduates for the practice
of engineering in industry. Industry involvement in the educational process can be very helpful in
devising programmes to meet this objective. Yet, engineering education has a number of other
stakeholders including students, faculty, academic administrators, and others. Identifying and
meeting the needs and wants of these various stakeholders is essential in developing educational
programs and learning activities that are effective and sustainable.
31
4. Preparation in earlier years of programme
In earlier times, when examinations were a dominant mode of assessment in most undergraduate courses,
the dissertation was a relatively novel opportunity to experience a different type of assessment. Now, with
course work much more widely used to assess both knowledge and skills, the dissertation should build on
writing, referencing and other information skills that the student has developed earlier in their studies
(Rowley and Slack 2004, 178).
An understanding of the research process (asking the right questions in the right way: conducting
experiments; and collating and evaluating information) must be a key part of any undergraduate
curriculum (Ramell 2006).
A common comment of examiners about final-year projects and dissertations (FYPD) is that students do
not appear to have been adequately prepared. This is confirmed by research into the student experience
of dissertations (Todd et al. 2004). The transition to an independent piece of work can be problematic
for many students. Hence preparation for the FYPD should begin from the day students start in higher
education and in designing degree programmes it is useful to map back from the FYPD the skills and ways
of thinking which need to be developed in earlier courses.
There are hopeful signs that this is happening in a number of places. For example, Rowley and Slack
(2004) argue that while in the past the FYPD was often the first chance for students to gain skills in
independent learning and research, now research skills are integral to many degrees right from the start.
Healey and Jenkins (2009) describe the pedagogical shift that is beginning to occur through examples of
degree programmes which introduce students to research from the start of their degree. In one case,
students begin their research training even earlier, since at the University of Gloucestershire the
induction process includes a research project that students complete during induction week before
beginning their formal studies (Centre for Active Learning 2010). At Roskilde University in Denmark, half
of the assessed marks in each year of the Bachelor and Masters programmes are based on project work,
with inter-disciplinary group work dominating in the early years and gradually moving to independent,
discipline-based projects (Legge 1997). Over 80% of students at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology (MIT) undertake at least one undergraduate research opportunity programme often in their
junior year, mostly in addition to their studies (Huggins et al. 2007). These instances of engaging students
in research and inquiry throughout their degree further illustrate the concept of student as producer
(Chapter 2).
Willison and O’Reagan (2007) have devised a research skill development framework for undergraduate
students to guide them from the moment they start at university to the completion of their dissertation.
In a series of levels, students move from reproducing existing knowledge, communicating in lay language
and evaluating information according to prescribed criteria, to the other end of the spectrum where they
use disciplinary language, extend knowledge, and self-generated criteria. Willison (2012, 917-918) in a
recent Australian study found an unanticipated result: ‘Explicit research skill development in regular
courses has the capacity to be more effective than mentored undergraduate research in helping students
develop question framing skills and in encouraging students to progress to research degrees.’
32
Nottingham Trent University has a series of ‘critical practices modules’ in art and design which help
prepare students for final-year projects and dissertations by introducing them to the research process
early on (Case study 1.6).
Case study 1.6 Developing authentic undergraduate research in art and design at
Nottingham Trent University, UK
The critical practices modules occur throughout the students’ undergraduate degree in Years 1, 2
and 3. The process of teaching in Years 1 and 2 develops the focus on research, and also on
collaborative learning. The modules concentrate on critical and contextual thought and practice in
the context of an undergraduate design programme. The teaching starts from the premise that the
research process as an inquiry should have primacy, and that the modes of development and
exposition should be ‘authentic’ to the research context. Authenticity in relation to a creative art
and design programme is understood to include creative art and design practice. Student research
is as likely to be situated in the context of developing creativity in the context of a primary school
as it might be focused on analysing the visual language of Jacobean play texts.
The University of Sunderland has explicitly stated that their focus for the whole undergraduate degree
has changed to become more research-focused, with a strong build-up to dissertations or final-year
projects (Case study 2.7).
Case study 2.7 Implementing a research active curriculum at the University of
Sunderland, UK
The University revised its institutional teaching and quality assurance processes in 2010 to deliver
an undergraduate curriculum that promotes progressive development of graduate research
attributes fostered through increased student engagement in enquiry. In the final year all
programmes ensure that students experience a suitable synoptic activity which helps them bring
together understanding of their discipline and professional area and prepares them for
employment and citizenship.
As well as specific research skills, students need to develop and practice the generic capabilities that they
will also require to make a success of their FYPD. These include report writing, verbal and visual
presentation, creativity, criticality, and independent decision making. Lee (2013), in an Australian context,
refers to this as the ‘trickle-down effect’ of implementing capstone projects on the entire undergraduate
curriculum. One particular skill which is becoming increasingly emphasised as student numbers increase is
that of teamwork.
Obtaining experience through group projects
One of the most significant ways that the case studies examined in this project have helped prepare
students for the dissertation is through practical projects that include teamwork. This enables students to
tackle a research project that can be larger and more significant than if they were on their own, helping
them obtain insight into the research process. It also gives students an opportunity to engage practically
in real-life situations and gain insights that would be unavailable sitting in a library. The University of
Utrecht has a particularly useful way of helping students to gain authentic team research experience in
the third year without needing to be involved in actual laboratory work, which comes later. The students
investigate a topic and methodology and write a PhD proposal together (Case study 5.10).
33
Case study 5.10 Bridging the gap between textbooks and scientific research: Cell
biology at the University of Utrecht
A third year course for cell biology majors focuses on writing and defending a research proposal
as an open ended authentic assignment; ie modelling much of the authentic research experience of
cell biologists, but not the actual laboratory tasks: and includes student teams writing a PhD
proposal. It builds on the more textbook-orientated knowledge and controlled laboratory
experiences in years one and two.
The 15-week course, with some 24 students, has three components:
1. A general research topic is defined by staff, and students read selected research papers with a
focus on research methodology and research questions.
2. Students are divided into four groups of six and out of class formulate a research question and
methodologies. They also visit relevant research laboratories, contact experts and discuss their
proposals in class with fellow students and staff.
3. Student teams present their final proposals to a jury of four staff (two cell biology specialists,
one biologist, and one non-biologist). The broad composition of the jury means that the
proposal should be clearly formulated for both specialists and non-specialists.
Students then take an extended senior research thesis (usually in the summer semester and often
extending into the summer vacation). Some students will work in the lab of jury members, as they
were invited to do their research project with them. Six years of course evaluations and a survey
of alumni have shown the initial difficulties students face in moving beyond textbook knowledge;
the value of the various components; and the course’s success in helping them to think as
scientists and better appreciate how research is conducted.
Another example of teamwork in preparation for the dissertation operates at the University of Tasmania,
where students design an experiment together and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of different
approaches (Case study 5.17).
Case study 5.17 Reorganisation of labs to develop research independence in
agricultural science at the University of Tasmania, Australia
The department radically revised laboratory teaching to address problems students and staff
encountered in a required final-year research project. Students frequently had difficulties in
understanding what was required and staff spent much time resolving such issues through
individual supervision. Lower level (laboratory) courses were revised to integrate laboratory
teaching with lecture-based and statistical methods courses. Laboratory-based activities were
developed which required students to work in teams with increasing levels of independence. For
example, the final ‘lab’ four-week activity had a paper by the lecturer in preparation for
publication, and a discussion of some future research options. Students were provided with all
information prior to the lab and divided into subgroups. Then as a whole class they designed the
experiment and discussed the relative advantages and disadvantages of the various approaches.
The students then ran the labs with support shifting from help to guidance with the final labs being
class (group) discussions around the (1) statistical analyses, then (2) the presentation and (3) the
meaning of each of the experiments.
34
A further example of teamwork comes from Olin College. Each year students participate in group-based
entrepreneurial engineering design projects, which build up to the senior capstone where they work in
multi-disciplinary teams of five to seven students on company sponsored projects (Case study 5.20).
Case study 5.20 Students work in multi-disciplinary teams on both year-long
engineering capstone projects for corporate sponsors and two- to three-year-long
entrepreneurial sustainable projects at Olin College, US
Olin College (US) is an innovative engineering institution with a curriculum from Year 1built
around group-based entrepreneurial engineering design projects. Early projects are shaped by
faculty but later ones are student designed with faculty support. Each year every student presents
a project they have been working on at the Fall Project Expo. In the final-year capstone, seniors
work in multi-disciplinary teams of five to seven students on full-year engineering projects for
partnering corporate sponsors. Olin works with companies and technology clients to develop
SCOPE projects that are important to the sponsor while providing a useful educational
experience for the student. The corporate partner commits financial and organisational support.
Olin provides a faculty advisor and dedicated work space and technical support and equipment.
The teams deliver formal mid-year and final reports to sponsors.
Partly drawing on the SCOPE experience, Olin with neighbouring Babson College (an
entrepreneurial business college) has recently developed a linked course that starts in the junior
year but can also serve as an alternative or additional capstone on ‘Affordable Design and
Entrepreneurship’. Student teams from Olin and Babson work on entrepreneurial but sustainable
projects around the world, including the US, in areas such as energy, water, health, agriculture,
transportation and communication. An ideal student path would be to complete an internship
with an initiative partner, take the course for two semesters, work for a mission-driven company
or NGO as an intern, and be part of launching a new social venture. The plan is for projects to
last two to three years, with dozens of students ‘getting on and off the (project) bus’ as one
course or one year is not enough time for the necessary technology and business model
development.
Extending projects over more than one year
A further way of training students to engage effectively in research and inquiry during their degree course
is to develop projects which occur over more than one year and hence give the students a progressive
learning experience. At Olin College they have affordable design and entrepreneurship projects which last
over two or three years with dozens of students ‘getting on and off the (project) bus’ (Case study 5.20).
More ambitiously students in the College of Engineering in Maryland are encouraged to live in the same
hall of residence for the first two years of a three-year project to encourage team bonding. The research
projects are student-initiated and tackle social issues, usually involving a significant technology focus (Case
study 5.19).
Case study 5.19 Across department undergraduate research programme in the
College of Engineering, Maryland, US
Gemstone is a highly innovative programme for selected ‘honors’ students in engineering and
other disciplines. The programme is now in its 17th year. Student teams, formed in the freshman
year, undertake three-year, student-initiated research projects in which they analyse and propose
solutions to societal problems, which generally involve a significant technology focus. Team
members work as a co-ordinated group, investigating their project from the perspective of
35
individual majors, under the guidance of a faculty mentor. In their first two years students are
encouraged to live together in a hall of residence floor reserved for Gemstone participants. The
research projects, eg ‘a comparative study of erosion control measures in the Chesapeake Bay
area and homeowner response to such interventions’, are developed in consultation with outside
experts and agencies. In their final year student teams present their research to experts or
outside agencies and write a team thesis. The learning process mirrors the team-based
consultancy style research that students are likely to carry out after graduating. The students
present and defend their team research at the Team Thesis Conference. The presentations are
30-minutes long followed by 30 minutes of questions from the discussants and the audience.
Following this the team has one hour in a private discussion room with their discussants and
mentor for feedback on the presentation and thesis.
A variant on this is to develop projects which need several years to complete and to arrange for each
cohort of students to pass on where they have reached to the next cohort. This system of ‘inheritance’
has worked successfully in the history of science course at University College London (UCL) (Case study
5.18).
Case study 5.18 Science undergraduates build on research of previous students at
University College London, UK
The chief innovation in the history of science course at UCL is the mechanism of inheritance: each
year students receive a body of work produced by the previous group of students and make
improvements and additions to it; this process can be repeated until publishable materials are
produced. This is part of a system of learning that enables students to function as a real and
evolving community of researchers. First developed in a final third year course, it was then
opened up to second years to enable interested students to continue their work as part of their
dissertation, and to strengthen the diachronic community by having the previous year’s students
present when the next cohort take the course (Chang 2005, 2007). One outcome was a
monograph on the history of chlorine, which contained selected articles by undergraduates on
their research (Chang and Jackson 2007). Chang has now moved to Cambridge. However, since
2007-08, Ambrosio has developed a related course ‘Topics in the History of the Physical
Sciences’. Selected students investigate an aspect of the history of electricity from a variety of
angles: philosophical, sociological. Students produce an extended essay and their research
materials in a form that subsequent students can use. Open Resource digital technology is central
to the course including an online journal for student articles: with digital support making ‘the
editing work considerably more 'manageable', thus allowing our methodology to become 'more
transferable’ (Ambrosio and Jackson 2011).
Developing project proposals
Another approach to preparing students for their dissertation or final-year project is to have students
produce an outline or proposal for the dissertation in the year before they actually start. As Greenbank
and Penketh (2009) point out, critical reflection on how undergraduate students plan to undertake the
dissertation is an essential part of preparation. In the year before they begin their dissertation, St Mary’s
University College asks students in psychology to prepare a poster presentation which outlines their
dissertation proposal (Case study 4.14), and at Southampton Solent students taking their second year
coaching and development unit prepare a research plan (Case study 2.6). Aligning the research proposal
to the research methods course helps ensure embedded practice.
36
Case study 4.14 Student poster conference linked to dissertation in Psychology at St
Mary’s University College, UK
The psychology department at St Mary’s University College has integrated a required poster
session into the dissertation requirements. The research project – some 5,000 words – is handed
in the April of their final year. This counts for 80% of the final mark on that course. As with many
other UK institutions work on this project is meant to start in the second year. At St Mary’s
there is a required poster session in May of their second year at which students present and
discuss an initial outline of their work. This counts for 20% of the final grade on the project and is
assessed on visual content and presentation and student answers to questions about their project.
The poster session is run in the form of an academic conference, with all academic staff attending
as well as first-year and third-year students. Involving first-year students both increases the
numbers of questions that second year students have to answer, and perhaps most significantly
orientates first-year students as to how to carry out their research.
Case study 2.6 Coaching and community development at Southampton Solent
University, UK
The final-year unit Coaching and Community Development builds on a second year unit entitled
Coaching and Development. Students begin the third year with a clear idea and project plan as
they have been required to engage with industry partners, employers, and businesses during their
second year. The main function of the third year unit is to encourage students in groups to deliver
their own coaching and development initiative in the local community. Involvement of
practitioners has been an important factor in developing both the second and third year units and
there is now a ‘Dragons Den' element where students have to present their work to a mix of
academic staff and industry professionals. Students are assessed via a poster presentation in front
of partners from industry and are required to submit an individual reflective portfolio.
Preparing to communicate in different genres
In some universities and disciplines it is almost a given that students are considered researchers right
from the moment they arrive at university, and that most of the activities they carry out encourage
independent learning and help prepare them for the dissertation. However, this is usually still within the
world of a particular discipline, preparing students narrowly as apprentice academics rather than more
broadly as graduates who will need a complex range of skills and abilities in their future lives whether in
an academic job or not.
The English Language degree at the University of Gloucestershire has attempted to broaden the possible
shape that a dissertation can take, allowing students to include as part of their dissertation an artefact
based on their research, which could be an article, a play, a poem, a guide, or a website (Case study
1.12). One finding from this process is that students were enthusiastic to create artefacts such as guides
for teachers, blog entries or children’s workbooks, but struggled with writing anything beyond a straight
academic essay because they were not used to it. The question is how to prepare students to be able to
write skilfully in more than one genre – something that could give them new insights into their research
topic as well as being useful later in life. It would be impossible to include explicit instructions in how to
write a good teacher’s guide, a vision statement, a polemic, a personal reflection and all the other
possible genres students might want to write in, of course. The approach that is being tried is to help
students develop flexibility in their writing by giving them skills in recognising the conventions of a genre
and then using these conventions to shape their own writing and speaking. Four genres that students do
this for are: a) academic writing, b) internet forums, c) written ethical argumentation, and d)
37
political/social speeches. However the idea could be applied to many other genres since the skills in
recognising genre conventions and reproducing them are transferable. The results of this training are still
being evaluated, but the aim is to help prepare students not only to do well in their dissertation but to
have many paths and possibilities for the future that they are skilful and confident enough to take.
Case study 1.12 Letting the apple fall further from the tree: The creation of a guide
to inform students of the diversity of possible forms that an English Language
dissertation can take at the University of Gloucestershire, UK
This case study discusses the initial findings from introducing a guide to inform students about the
diversity of possible forms an English Language dissertation can take (Stibbe 2011). Further
research will examine the impact of the dissertation guide on the kind of dissertation that
students actually select and the quality of the final product. One of the defining characteristics of a
dissertation is that it is an independent piece of work where the student has the freedom to
choose their own research topic, methodology and, to some extent, format and writing style.
Assignment briefs often prescribe the word limit, hand in date, learning outcomes and assessment
criteria, but are careful not to specify further details about the topic or approach since these are
up to the student. Ironically though, the lack of specificity can lead to a reduction in choice, since
in their desire to produce ‘what is expected’ students often default to the standard textbooks of
their course, the journals of their discipline, or previous dissertations, but not beyond. This
project has produced a more detailed and specific assessment brief and process for dissertations.
The brief outlines the essential characteristics of a dissertation and describes a wide range of
possibilities for the shape and form that the dissertation can take. The process is designed to
provide students with a strong support structure to give them confidence in the direction they
choose for their dissertation. Initial feedback suggests that students are delighted both to be
offered a range of possibilities to consider and to have a clear structure in which to undertake
their project.
David Lynch (1992) says: ‘We think we understand the rules when we become adults but what we really
experienced is a narrowing of the imagination.’ Ideally, as students go through university and ‘learn the
rules’ they will simultaneously experience a widening of the imagination as new possibilities open up in
front of them and they gain a broad range of skills.
At the University of Leeds, an innovative internship programme engages bioscience students in a project
where they develop educational resources. This is a particularly useful exercise in terms of gaining skills in
multiple genres, since the educational resources will be in a different style from the straight academic
discourse of the dissertation (Case study 5.13).
Case study 5.13 Students undertake paid internships as agents of change or
educational researchers in biosciences at the University of Leeds, UK
The Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Leeds has started to run two programmes of nonlaboratory internships for first and second year students. These provide good training for
undergraduates who opt for the educational development dissertation. The first, badged as
Students as agents of change is where students work in groups to develop a resource to enhance
the curriculum; it can be something they have identified themselves as being needed within their
programme or a project initiated by a member of staff. The second scheme is where the intern
contributes (individually) to an educational research project. Examples of continuing projects
38
include podcasting of research seminars for student and staff use; improvements to educational
environment; collation and evaluation of open educational resources for teachers and students.
Jacques et al. (1981, 102) model the dissertation process as ‘Getting Going; Sorting Out; Keeping Going;
and Ending Up’. This chapter has attempted to show that the stage ‘Getting Going’ starts not at the
beginning of a dissertation module, but when a student first sets foot in the university. Transforming
students into researchers who can confidently conduct and write up a project within the discourse of a
discipline is a challenge, but one that is being met across a wide range of universities. Opening up
students’ imaginations and equipping them with skills to choose from an expanded range is another
challenge, one that may be just as important in preparing students for life beyond university.
39
5. Engagement with community groups and employers
The academy must become a more vigorous partner in the search for answers to our most pressing social,
civic, economic and moral problems, and must affirm its historic commitment to what I call the scholarship
of engagement (Boyer 1996, 13).
Employers tell us they want clear communicators who are strong critical thinkers and who can solve realworld problems in an ethical way (AAC&U 2009). To achieve these outcomes, we believe that colleges
and universities must create an educational culture that promotes engaged student learning. Faculty, staff
and administrators must work together to help students take responsibility for their own learning and their
own lives and see themselves as constructors of knowledge rather than passive recipients of information
(Hodge et al., 2011, 29).
Benefits
There is considerable evidence that student engagement with community groups and employers benefits
their learning while making a practical contribution to communities and companies. Mason O’Connor et
al. (2011), for example, note that the literature on community engagement through the curriculum
suggests it enhances the quality of academic work, employability and lifelong learning. Furthermore they
comment that: ‘There is strong evidence to suggest that placements involving community-based learning
can provide a range of graduate attributes (knowledge, skills and value systems) that support
employability and enhance the quality of student‘s academic work.’ (p.38). Hill et al. (2011, 332)
moreover, argue:
A traditional research project prepares the minority of very able students for further academic study.
However, for the majority of students of all abilities seeking employment outside higher education, it may
not instil the core personal and transferable skills required by many employers.
External engagement with real issues has been shown to increase students’ confidence through placing
them in positions of responsibility (Clouder 2009), and exposing them to a greater diversity of learning
experiences (Lee et al. 2010). It can be ‘highly developmental, particularly when it is linked to a
personally-valued purpose and engaged with critically and reflectively’ (Lester and Costley 2010, 563).
The quality and effectiveness of the student experience of external research may have a lasting impact on
their future careers (Ryser et al. 2013). Projects and dissertations - where part or all of the research is
conducted externally - therefore have considerable value, not just for professional subjects but also
across the curriculum. The work-based project in humanities at Sheffield Hallam is an innovative and
successful example of providing external engagement for students studying English Language and other
humanities subjects (Case study 1.9). In Australia four universities collaborate in finding students work
placement projects. They have found that participating students are more readily employed (Case study
5.6).
Case study 1.9 Final-year work-based projects in the humanities at Sheffield Hallam
University, UK
The University has been running work-based projects in the humanities for 17 years.
Undergraduate students in English Language take a single work-based learning module as a
compulsory part of their degree in the second year, and it is open as an option for all other
40
humanities students, including final years, to take. The module itself is spread over one year, and
includes six taught sessions and a series of tutorials. Examples of recent projects include:







writing a handbook for volunteers working with dementia sufferers in residential homes;
writing for the in-house film magazine and managing external relationships with the
Showroom Arts Cinema;
publicity for a local city farm tapping into local magazine culture for wider publicity;
project work for FURD: Football Unites, Racism Divides;
youth group leadership;
Student Union Volunteering committee chair and publicity responsibilities;
'Homestart' work supporting new mothers in their own homes (mature student project).
Students produce a portfolio which includes a skills audit, learning log and diary, supporting
materials, and SWOT analysis. The module guide places a strong emphasis on reflection, with the
3000-word ‘Reflective Learning Diary’ being central to the assessment. Importantly, the guide
encourages not just reflection but critical reflection. The guide requires students to reflect on
academic aspects of their work, on the skills involved, their own and others’ behaviour, and,
importantly, ‘the ethical, social, cultural and institutional contexts of the work’ including
‘constantly monitoring the ‘rightness’ of what we do, are asked to do, and ask others to do’ as
well as ‘questioning institutional or individual practice when necessary’.
Case study 5.6 Linking students with industry through co-operative education for
enterprise development (CEED) in four Australian Universities
The CEED projects are open to final-year undergraduates or Masters level students studying
Engineering, Information Technology, Business, Science, Sustainable Management, and Food
Technology or Food Studies in four Australian universities. Industry-based training is integrated
with the student’s university degree. Approximately 90 students a year work during term time onsite with a local industry host. They work for course credits, normally for a minimum of three
days a week for a semester. Most projects are ‘practical’ or R&D focused giving students the
opportunity to develop applied research skills in a real-world context. CEED has reviewed
hundreds of projects and found that the students who participate are more readily employed on
graduation.
Developing links with community groups builds on Boyer’s (1996) work on the scholarship of
engagement or scholarship of application (Braxton et al. 2003) and what others in the US and Australia
have called ‘public scholarship’ (Colbeck and Michael 2006; Krause 2007). Boyer (1996, 13) argues
strongly that ‘the academy must become a more vigorous partner in the search for answers to our most
pressing social, civic, economic and moral problems’, such as issues around austerity, poverty and
addressing climate change. But equally there is a need to harness the reciprocal application of community
experience to the development of knowledge (Eyler and Giles 1999). This can mean adopting a radically
different approach to teaching and learning, as Rice (2003) argues:
Teaching that takes students into the community and involves genuinely engaged learning such as
service-learning and learning communities extending beyond the campus are intrinsically
contextual and social. Faculty members will have to rethink both their relationship to students
and the ways they interact with community partners. Honoring what can be learned from practice
and building it into the scholarly process will be a major challenge.
41
Many of the examples of community-based learning follow DeLind and Link’s (2004, 127) dictum that:
‘Before losing themselves in the virtual or plunging headlong into the international, students need to
carefully and critically examine what exists … outside their front (and back) doors.’ A good example of
engaging students in community-based research comes from Bates College in the US. It was one of the
first schools in the States to receive the Carnegie Foundation’s Community Engagement Classification for
both its curriculum and its outreach and partnership programmes (Case study 3.16).
Case study 3.16 Community-based research at Bates College, Maine, US
Bates has a strong social service, citizenship ethos (it was founded by abolitionists in 1865 and
gave early support for black and female enrolment at the College) and more recently has
developed a strong focus on ‘service learning and supporting students as active informed citizens’.
Recently this public service mission has been greatly strengthened in scale and given a central
academic focus through the establishment in 2005 of the Harward Center for Community
Partnerships. The three main goals of the Centre are:
1. Based on previous service learning, student and staff volunteering, the Centre aims to build a
strong scholarly research-based approach that both supports community development but
also transforms teaching and research in the disciplines. Several departments have now
integrated research-based service learning into their courses and senior capstones. Some
departments now offer research methods courses that focus specifically on collaborating with
the community for research.
2. An important priority is working with faculty and community partners as a ‘Collaboratory’ to
transform in-term and out-of-term research learning opportunities and the mainstream
curricula in the disciplines at Bates.
3. The Harward Centre seeks to build long-term projects founded in community needs and
student and faculty research interests that enable students and faculty to work with
community partners on issues of common concern. The projects are co-generated by
community partners and faculty. Thus one project had local museum staff working with
humanities students who were learning and using oral history research methodologies to
interview former mill workers to develop a travelling exhibit about Lewiston’s mills and mill
workers in the 20th century.
Portland State University has taken this engagement of students in community-based learning further than
most by requiring all their students to participate in a community-based capstone course (Case study
3.1).
Case study 3.1 Compulsory community-based learning capstone project at Portland
State University, US
During the final year each undergraduate student is required to participate in a senior capstone
project, which constitutes the culmination of their university studies programme. The senior
capstone is a community-based learning experience that provides an opportunity for students to
apply the expertise they have learned in their major to real issues and problems in the
community; and enhances students’ ability to work in teams, necessitating collaboration with
people from different fields of specialisation. Each student works with a team of students and
faculty. And every senior capstone must result in some form of summation, closing project, or
product that represents completion of the students' programme experience.
42
There is a weight of evidence that community and employer-based learning generates mutual gains for
higher education students, staff, communities and community groups and businesses (Table 5).
Table 5 Benefits of engaging in community and work-based learning
Benefits to students
 Development of critical thinking, gaining insight into the complex nature of knowledge, showing
enthusiasm for a subject and understanding related to it (Burack et al. 2010; Contis et al. 2010;
Deeley, 2010).
 ‘Provides a foundation for civic and social growth facilitating deeper inter-cultural and interethnic understanding, and fosters a lifelong commitment to giving (Eyler and Giles 1999; Brewis
et al. 2010)” (Mason O’Connor et al. 2012, 16).
 Potential to address issues and opportunities affecting the public; and build on the knowledge,
contacts and skills of community organisations (Hardwick and Coffey 2010; Stoeker and Tyron
2009; Brewis et al. 2010).
 Kuh (2009) argues that internships, community service, and senior capstone courses provide
opportunities to integrate and apply knowledge.
Benefits to staff/faculty
 COBALT (1999) argues that staff gain through networking, keeping up to date and the pleasure
of seeing their students’ attainments.
 Derounian (2007) notes the value of drawing on graduate practitioners to feed back into
undergraduate teaching and learning. Staff and students gain from the input of up-to-date case
studies and practical examples to complement and, in some cases, challenge theory.
Benefits for communities, community groups and businesses
 Engaging students can extend organisational capacity.
 The connection may help to foster longer-term collaborations between higher education
institutions, community groups and businesses.
 Student engagement can assist organisational stability and continuity.
 Access to hands-on support and university expertise, students’ energy, enthusiasm and ideas,
‘low-cost help (main cost is time spent working with students) and opportunities to tackle
tasks that could not otherwise be funded’; the chance to influence university courses and
develop programmes more appropriate to local needs; identify potential employees and staff
development links; also to gain a clearer idea of how the university operates and what it can
provide (University of Brighton 2012).
 Increase public awareness of key issues (University of Minnesota 2012).
 Increase public support in the community as young people become ambassadors for their
universities, homes, and other networks (National Service-Learning Clearinghouse 2012).
Source: Based in part on Mason O’Connor et al. (2011, 16-18)
43
Engaging with community organisations and employers
For several decades in professional subjects, such as nursing, marketing and engineering, students have
completed dissertations that involved engagement beyond the walls of the university with community
groups, public institutions or commercial businesses. For example, agribusiness students at the University
of Queensland undertake a compulsory capstone course in which they complete overseas projects for
Australian agribusiness companies (Case study 2.4).
Case study 2.4 International on-course market research experience for final semester
Bachelor of Agribusiness students at the University of Queensland, Australia
The last and most important piece of work undertaken is the final semester international market
research project for fee-paying Australian agribusinesses. Overseas research experience is
regarded as critical in the professional development of these students, as the future of
agribusiness in Australia lies in its global competitiveness. This compulsory capstone involves
groups of four to five students, guided by an experienced academic mentor, working on their
client's project for the whole of the second semester (August to early November). In late
September each group travels overseas for two weeks to do the in-market research and they are
required to have the whole project finished and a full report back to the company, orally and in
writing, during the first week of November.
When a project involves working with a community organisation or employer it adds an additional
stakeholder to the project. To minimise the tensions that can result, it is good practice to draw up
learning contracts between students, the university and the organisation involved which specify the
responsibilities of each of the partners (Matthews et al. 1995).
Problem or inquiry-based learning in community and workplace settings has proven to be ‘an effective
approach to teaching as real-life, problem-based learning provides opportunities for students to find
academic activities meaningful and worthwhile’ (Lee et al. 2010, 563). For example, the geography
department at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand, has been running an inquiry-based course in
service learning for several years in which students undertake projects for community organisations and
the format has proved easily modifiable for earthquake response and recovery research, following the
Christchurch earthquakes of 2010-12 (Case study 4.16).
Case study 4.16 Capstone service-learning project in geography at the University of
Canterbury, New Zealand
This final-year course is for between 40 and 60 students working in groups of five or six. It was
set up more than a decade ago as an inquiry-based learning course, with students responsible for
undertaking research selected from a suite of topics assembled by academic staff (Spronken-Smith
2005). Six years ago, this format was subsumed within a service-learning framework, with the
topics formulated in conjunction with community groups. The key to its successful operation is
the negotiation of roles and responsibilities between students, community partners and academic
staff (the latter acting as advisors, not supervisors). The course runs for a semester (12 weeks)
with minimal formal contact time, although it begins with a residential weekend away from
campus so all parties can meet each other and for students to engage in research methods
workshops. It ends with a public presentation of class findings. Assessment is 60% group-based
and 40% individually-based. The individual items are a short essay at the start of the course
assessing previous published work relevant to the topic, and a reflective essay at the mid-point.
44
Marks for group work (a 5,000-word written report and the conference presentation) are
moderated with input from each group member, including the staff advisor.
An assessment of the impact of this learning method on student engagement showed that
students with high, moderate or low levels of engagement in their university careers, according to
measures derived from the Australasian Survey of Student Engagement, all experienced enhanced
engagement in the course. Those previously deemed to be least engaged reported the biggest
gains (O’Steen et al. 2011). Since 2011, the format has proved readily adaptable for undertaking
earthquake response and recovery research, following the Christchurch earthquake disaster of
2010-12.
The case studies examined in this chapter can be described along a spectrum from students engaging in
small scale projects for local community groups to taking a work placement with a large multi-national
corporation. Typically the smaller and more community-focused the organisation, the more
independence and scope there is for self-initiated projects, while larger corporations offer a more
structured and directed experience. There is also a spectrum of involvement of the host organisation,
from just providing a workplace for students, to offering supervision, sponsoring projects and even
marking student work. In the international market research project at the University of Queensland, the
employer provides sponsorship and is responsible for 35% of the assessment (Case study 2.4), while the
following systems engineering project at the University of Macquarie allows employers to award 10% of
the marks (Case study 5.1).
Case study 5.1 Collaborative and student-driven learning approaches to capstone
units in ICT at Macquarie University, Australia
The Systems Engineering Project was designed in 2001 as a programme to create alliances
between top computing students, academics and industry to their mutual benefit. From the
student’s viewpoint, the objective of this programme is to assist them in taking responsibility and
initiative for their own learning and prepare them for a career in ICT, which will primarily involve
working in project teams to deliver ICT solutions. To meet this objective, the students manage
their own projects and present a lecture series to peers. From the project sponsor’s standpoint,
the objective is to gain students who have a firm foundation in the fundamentals of computer
science and an ability to apply and adapt that knowledge to solve real business concerns. Benefits
to the university are the provision of an industry-relevant experience for students and the
creation of a bridge between academics and industry partners.
In some cases students may gain from work-based learning through role play. For example, in the
broadcast journalism course at the University of Gloucestershire they put aside a whole week for
students to run their own news organisation (Case study 1.4).
Case study 1.4 Advanced Newsweek: Work-based learning and employability skills
for student journalists at the University of Gloucestershire, UK
This third year double module aims to consolidate journalism theory and practice into one
intensive ‘Newsweek’ where students operate their own news organisation across the three
media platforms of television, radio and online news. Using a purpose-built production office
alongside television and radio studios, the students elect their newsroom roles and formulate
working rotas to research and produce news bulletins, programmes and a news website for one
40-hour intensive week.
45
The module aims to enhance relevant employability skills. Students run their own newsroom and
utilise vocational skills that are less explicit in other modules such as strategic thinking and
problem-solving, as well as understanding group and individual motivation. They are required to
act (and dress) in a professional manner and to maintain a high level of respect while making often
difficult and instant decisions to tight deadlines. Teaching and learning is blended with 12 weeks of
tutor-led lectures, seminars and workshops, followed by a student-led ‘practise Newsweek’
before the assessed Newsweek begins. During the assessed period, students carry out their own
primary research to gather and produce daily news to industry standard. They brand and present
programmes from inception to completion. At the end of each news programme they hold an
editorial meeting in which they reflect on the experience and finished ‘product’. This encourages
individual and peer-to-peer reflection which is used to enhance the next programme, and the
student’s cycle of progression becomes noticeable after the first day of operating a ‘rolling
newsroom’. The module integrates the development of research and vocational skills in an
intensive real-world setting.
Then there are courses which are entirely work-based. For example, at the University of Bolton they
have an inter-disciplinary action research course based around inquiry which is entirely work-based.
Case study 3.3 Inter-disciplinary inquiry-based learning (IDIBL) focused on action
research in the workplace at the University of Bolton, UK
The IDIBL framework project has developed an undergraduate and postgraduate module for
inquiry-based learning, which includes final-year honours projects. The student is an actionresearcher who must identify an opportunity for improvement in their work-context. Learners
support each other in an online community to combine study with work. The modules contained
within the framework focus on process, and generic concepts and outcomes, rather than subject
content. Through a process of negotiation between individual learners and course staff, a
personalised inquiry is developed to include learning activities and assessment products that meet
the module requirements, and are informed by the learners’ professional practice. The student
then plans what they will do, undertakes it in their own work context, evaluates the action, and
revises the plan.
Students may also gain experiences of working on authentic projects by undertaking consultancies for
external clients. At Miami University they work in inter-disciplinary teams to provide innovative digital
solutions for paying clients (Case study 3.6), while at the University of Central Lancashire students taking
community sports development courses complete consultancy projects for community organisations
(Case study 2.1) and at the University of Otago undergraduate oral health students in the Faculty of
Dentistry are required to produce a patient education resource for a target group in their local
community (Case study 4.17).
Case study 3.6 Involving students in inter-disciplinary interactive media consultancy
projects at Miami University, Ohio, US
Interactive Media Studies at Miami University is an inter-disciplinary programme (including
Computer Science, Engineering, Management Information Sciences, English, Marketing, Graphic
Design, and Education) that brings together students and faculty to investigate how interactive
media informs and transforms their disciplinary perspective. The programme has been running
since 1996 and uses problem-based learning and team-oriented projects to help students learn
46
how to apply their theoretical knowledge to innovative digital solutions for a paying client. About
100 students a year take the programme. Students work in groups of up to 20. The students
decide how to divide up tasks; typically there are groups undertaking development, design and
marketing. The programmes are team taught with the last two weeks spent on de-briefing and
talking about what they’ve learnt. The students are typically in class four hours a week, but spend
many more hours visiting clients, undertaking research or doing user testing. They make a
presentation to their client at the end of the project. Commercial companies are charged $20,000
(c£13,250) per project paid on delivery; non-profit organisations and charities are typically
charged c$5,000 (c£3,300). They found that the client did not take it as seriously when no charge
was made. From the client’s perspective, they get out-of-the-box thinking that they would never
obtain from consultants. The clients typically end up with something that far exceeds their
expectations. The students find it surprising and challenging to manage the changes which
commonly occur during the development stage of a project.
Case study 2.1 Engaging students in applied research through a community sports
development consultancy project at the University of Central Lancashire, UK
The final-year Community Sports Development module acts as a capstone for Sports Coaching
students. It is taken in addition to the honours dissertation. Students work as a project team on a
consultancy brief with a partner agency and recommend strategies that can be used to support
community development through sports and coaching initiatives. There are normally eight to12
consultancy briefs divided up among 40-50 students, with students creating their own consultancy
teams. Examples include: a ‘health check’ of football refereeing in Blackburn; a community sport
and crime reduction project; and a consultancy on community sport.
Case study 4.17 Promoting oral health in a local community at the University of
Otago, New Zealand
The Bachelor of Oral Health programme has a particular focus on health promotion and a strong
awareness of socio-cultural influences on health. Graduates of the programme are registered
health professionals who are part of the oral health care team. Undergraduate students are
required to produce a patient education resource for a target group in their local community.
Each year a different target group is identified and a context for use of the resource is provided.
Students are required to research a topic and produce a five to seven minute video (on DVD)
that includes appropriate scientific information. Students work in groups of three or four, and
engage in a variety of learning activities that develop a range of skills including critical thinking,
evaluation of the literature, communication, time management, problem solving and collaboration.
Each project extends over approximately 13 weeks and has 50 timetable hours. Assessment is
based on a presentation to class and colleagues, supporting documents, self and peer assessment
of each member’s contribution to their group, and an individual written report.
Ethical, mutuality and resource issues
When students engage with external organisations a degree of caution is necessary, since there may be
tensions between the corporate ethics of the organisation and the student’s own belief system (Moore
2007). Bakan (2009), for instance, provides a stark critique of corporations where the overriding pursuit
of profit may lead to harm for customers, the wider society and the environment. The work-based
project at Sheffield Hallam (Case study 1.9, above) attempts to avoid this problem by encouraging
students to find unpaid work with schools, charities or the students’ union. Similarly, the extended
47
sociology project at Birmingham City University asks students to work with a local group that supports
others, such as an activist organisation fostering refugee rights (Case study 4.9).
Case study 4.9 Encouraging students’ critical engagement with community-based
publics and issues at Birmingham City University, UK
This final-year extended project provides students with an opportunity to undertake an applied
venture, or a library-based piece of research in an area that is of particular interest and relevance
to them, and that is informed by the tenets of public sociology. Students are responsible for either
coming up with a topic themselves, or working with a local group that supports others and adopts
a public sociology perspective. Prescriptive details for extended projects are not given; the
expectation is that students will negotiate these with supervisors. Once they decide on a topic,
they dedicate one day a week to this for the rest of the two terms of the third year of their
degree. They also keep a reflexive learning log (as they did during the second term of their second
year when they undertook a project or placement) focusing on the significance of their work, and
informed by both academic and practice literature.
Another approach to dealing with ethical issues is to allow students to work in a wide range of
organisations, including for-profit corporations, but with the explicit instruction to be critical and
reflective. Valentin (1999) argues that it is essential that external learning ‘as well as focusing on the
development of individual competence for work, allows space to challenge dominant organisational
ideological assumptions and practices’. The mechanical engineering final-year project at the University of
Adelaide is industry sponsored, but deals with ethical issues by requiring an understanding of the social,
cultural, global and environmental responsibilities of the professional engineer, and the need for
sustainable development (Case study 5.5).
Case Study 5.5 The mechanical engineering final-year project at the University of
Adelaide, Australia
The final-year project in the School of Mechanical Engineering aims to provide solutions to
engineering problems related to industry or to scientific research, with emphasis on project
management and effective communication. It is considered to be an important part of the
engineering education process and projects sponsored by local industry are strongly encouraged.
Industry supported projects enhance student skills through relevant real-world projects in
research and development, and benefit industry through expertise transfer, innovation and
development. Unlike traditional engineering honours projects - where individual students work on
research-based questions - this one actively encourages projects involving teams. In addition,
recognising the diverse range of careers that graduates enter, any type of venture is allowed so
long as it meets minimum criteria. Students are encouraged to suggest projects themselves as
these often lead to outstanding results.
The module guide for the work-based project at Sheffield Hallam similarly asks students to critically
reflect on ‘the ethical, social, cultural and institutional contexts of the work’ including ‘constantly
monitoring the ‘rightness’ of what we do, are asked to do, and ask others to do’ and ‘questioning
institutional or individual practice when necessary’ (module guide quoted by Stibbe 2012, 10).
Where projects are community-based, another key issue to be aware of is mutuality. Students may be
paying high fees to the university, but part of the actual training and learning experience is being provided
for free by a community group or business. In such cases it is important that benefits to the community
48
exceed the resources it expends in hosting the student. The University of Brighton (2012) reinforces and
extends the point in working ‘to develop sustainable partnerships between the university and its local
community that are of mutual benefit and that address issues of marginalisation and disadvantage’.
A final issue concerns the resource implications of externally engaged FYPD. A number of the case
studies examined describe the high costs of finding opportunities for students, vetting employers, and
supporting students as they adapt to a working environment, solving issues between employers and
students, and training students in the critical and reflective skills required for this kind of project. On the
other hand, in addition to the benefits gained by students there are also benefits for the university in
establishing relationships with local businesses and community groups for outreach and knowledge
transfer.
Overall, engaged projects and dissertations - where students complete part or all of their research in
external bodies - offer great potential benefits to students, staff and the community organisations and
employers they work with. Many problems can be avoided through careful design, but they can be
resource-intensive. As COBALT (1999 1) notes, community-based learning creates an:
extra workload ... for supervisors. However most felt that they were compensated by the benefits
of student attainment, the chance to build and maintain their own networks and the opportunity
to keep up with practical developments in their field.
49
6. Assessment
Assessment is the single most powerful influence on learning in formal courses and, if not designed well,
can easily undermine … [innovative] teaching and learning approaches (Boud et al. 1999, 413).
The assessment of final-year projects and dissertations (FYPD) is critical not only because they form a
major piece of work for the students, but also because students are, in most cases, expected to
demonstrate achievement of many of the key programme learning outcomes as a ‘capstone’ to their
studies. Comparability of standards between different forms of FYPD is an important issue. As
accountability pressures grow, the FYPD are increasingly seen as an important way to assess the learning
experience of students in their major or degree programme (Jones et al 2012). This has been recognised
in Sweden where the only piece of student work that is examined by the external quality panel of experts
charged to evaluate standards is the independent degree project (Swedish National Agency for Higher
Education 2011). Moreover it is recognised that capstone projects in Australia can ‘provide a robust
vehicle for assessing the professional capabilities of individual students who are about to graduate, as well
as provide evidence of the effectiveness and standards of a programme of study for accreditation’ (Rasul
et al. 2009, 209). The case for the importance of FYPD in evaluating programme outcomes in Australia
has been strengthened with the development of discipline-based standards.
Diversifying the form of assessment
Diversifying FYPD means considering a wider range of assessment tasks (Biggs and Tang, 2011). Adopting
a mixture of assignments enables students to develop their own interests and engage more fully with the
learning process. As Bloxham and Boyd (2007, 34) argue: ‘We need an assessment process which more
closely judges the students’ capacity to act as well as to express their factual and conceptual knowledge
of the topic.’ Assessment should be integral and not separate from learning. In providing students with a
choice as to how they undertake their FYPD and a degree of flexibility in how it is assessed, students
should gain greater ownership of the process. This can be enhanced by allowing students to showcase
their work in a variety of ways including undergraduate conferences, end-of-year degree shows,
presentations to colleagues, academics and professionals, production of documentaries and preparing
consultancy reports, as well as, or in some cases instead of, a written thesis.
It is important that students experience a variety of different learning approaches through their degree
programmes because this helps them gain what they will require in future roles in society. It is crucial
therefore, when designing FYPD, to consider the wealth of possibilities. This also applies to assessment.
Considering new, different or varied forms of assessment can enhance the student learning experience. It
can, for example, ‘be useful to consider the balance between generic educationally-focused learning and
work-based/professionally-focused learning’ (Macquarie University 2009, 4). Furthermore it may be
beneficial to students to offer a range of options, which provide them with an opportunity to develop
knowledge and key skills in their area of interest, rather than trying to go for a one-size-fits-all.
Students in biosciences at the University of Plymouth are offered a choice of undertaking either a
traditional dissertation or a group project including individual analysis and write up supplemented by an
individual research proposal (Case study 5.4).
50
Case study 5.4 Research into practice: an alternative format for final-year biosciences
honours project at the University of Plymouth, UK
Research into Practice includes a research proposal as an assessed element, instead of having the
bulk of marks awarded for the writing of a dissertation. The new format encourages more
external employer engagement. The module assists students looking for a more directed
approach and requires them to sign up to a single project where the protocol for data collection
is largely written by the project advisor. Data collection is then carried out by the group and the
results are pooled, before being analysed and written up on an individual basis. The new format is
similar to an extended laboratory investigation and, consequently, the project advisor is largely
responsible for the planning and any risk or ethical assessments. As students taking projects in the
new format have not designed their own research study they have to carry out a separate
research proposal assessment to meet this learning outcome; albeit after students have carried
out the data collection and analysis. The research proposal is communicated via a template and
although the student does not have to carry out the proposed study, it does need to be realistic,
affordable and capable of completion by an undergraduate.
Assessment, in the sense of the grade the work obtains, is a focal point for students (Biggs and Tang
2011). Hence if we want students to engage with the holistic process of learning then the way the
curriculum is designed, including assessment, is central. This requires curriculum developers to consider
the purpose of FYPD and how they can be designed to suit a variety of student requirements.
To accommodate varying student needs some degree programmes, such as Plymouth’s biosciences
degree (see also Case study 5.12 later in this chapter), provide a choice for students as to what is
assessed in their FYPD. Other courses, such as the University of Greenwich’s Design dissertation, are
more specific in their FYPD assessment outputs, but the choice remains with the student regarding what
to research and produce. Students generate a written piece alongside a physical artefact which supports
their work, but this artefact and the topic are flexible and chosen by the individual (Case study 1.3).
Case study 1.3 Design dissertation: from practice to theory and back again at the
University of Greenwich, UK
In 2007 the dissertation experience of students in graphic and 3D digital design was reviewed.
Due to students reporting a lack of engagement with a solely text-based piece of research the
emphasis of the dissertation changed. It has become a ‘practice with theory’ model of learning.
This model of the ‘studio’ and the theory elements of a design course being more closely linked
has been tested in many undergraduate art and design courses with great success. The emphasis
now is on the quality of the research for the dissertation; so the experience becomes about how
to gather information and then communicate it in an appropriate manner. There is a strong visual
element to each project, which helps construct and define the students’ arguments. The ‘physical’
format of the final piece is highly flexible and links to the content of the written report. The main
evidence for success comes from students showing the dissertation as part of their final exhibition
and it featuring prominently in their portfolios. There is also anecdotal evidence that employers
have been surprised and impressed by the quality of the revised dissertation both in terms of form
and content.
Self and peer assessment are other ways of diversifying the assessment of FYPD. Self assessment is often
used to encourage students to reflect on their work. This may involve keeping a reflective diary or blog
as part of the process of undertaking the project. It may or may not be assessed by the tutor and form
51
part of the final mark. For example, media students at Swinburne University of Technology write a 1,000
word reflective self assessment (Case study 1.5 in Chapter 5). Peer assessment, in contrast, is most
commonly used where projects are undertaken in groups. There is pressure from students, particularly in
the final year, for summative marks to represent the work of individuals. Sometimes this may mean asking
for individual write-ups of projects. Alternatively there are well developed ways of using peer assessment
to redistribute group marks between team members. Arguably only the members of the group can
reasonably make judgements about the quality of the contribution of other team members to various
group activities. For example, as mentioned in Chapter 2, both peer and self assessment were used in an
environmental issues capstone project to redistribute the mark given to the group project among team
members (Healey and Addis 2004) (Case study 4.12).
Case study 4.12 Final-year students undertake team research projects on local
environmental issues at the University of Gloucestershire, UK
Issues in Environmental Geography ran for about a decade at the University as a final-year capstone
module; and an earlier version ran at Coventry University for several years. In its final form
students worked in groups of four to six on local environmental issues. The module was
concerned with analysing competing environmental philosophies, applying them to understanding a
particular local or regional environmental issue and coming up with policy recommendations. The
students developed their own projects, starting with a proposal. They were supported through
two key lectures on environmental philosophies, a workshop on effective teamwork and individual
group tutorials on their chosen topics. The semester-long course was assessed through a group
report (60%); oral presentation of project (30%) and an individual learning journal and reflective
essay (together counting for 10%). The marks given for the group project were redistributed
among group members using peer and self assessment of the quality and effectiveness of their
contributions on a five point scale to five group processes (ideas and suggestions; leadership,
group organisation and support, minute taking; data collection/collation/analysis; report writing,
production and editing; and preparing/giving verbal presentation). The average mark for the
module was consistently c3-5% points higher than for other modules, reflecting the benefits of
working in teams. The difference in marks was confirmed by external examiners.
Assuring standards
Designing different approaches to assessing FYPD may help meet a range of students’ needs, but it may
also raise concerns about maintaining academic standards. In developing FYPD it is essential to ensure
that academic standards are maintained through the assessment process and there is comparability
between different forms of FYPD. Despite many disliking the process, academics in the UK are familiar
with working with generic assessment criteria for judging the quality of their own varied disciplinary
research outputs in past research assessment exercises and the current research excellence framework,
so this should not be a challenge for them (Research Excellence Framework 2012). Assurance of
standards of FYPD can be achieved in the design of the programme and learning outcomes and the design
of assessment criteria. Assurance of standards in the UK is overseen by a system of external examiners
and validation and periodic review of programmes with external involvement. Some FYPD programmes
provide options for students, so that students can choose the type of project which best suits their
requirements, interests and aspirations. Significantly the UK Quality Code chapter on assessment states
that: ‘Institutions can encourage staff to make use of different assessment methods by ensuring they have
access to expertise, internal and external, to support the development of assessment that focuses on
student achievement’ (QAA 2011, 5).
52
Where options are offered the case studies we have collected demonstrate that the clarity of the
learning outcomes, assessment criteria and detailed module guides are key in ensuring standards.
Although the outputs and nature of the projects can vary, if the expectations, in terms of student input
and the nature of the research and inquiry, are equivalent then academic standards should be assured.
The University of Leeds’ bioscience programme demonstrates how a range of different projects can be
offered while maintaining academic standards (Case study 5.12). Seven different types of project are
currently offered and this is shortly rising to nine.
Case study 5.12 Alternative final-year projects in the biosciences at the University of
Leeds, UK
Final-year students within the biomedical sciences group of programmes have the opportunity to
undertake one of the seven types of research project. Each project is of eight weeks duration,
with students expected to commit 3.5 days per week to their project. Students are provided with
a list of projects (with project descriptors) in March of the year preceding their final year and
invited to choose, in rank order, ten projects they would like to be considered for. Projects are
then allocated based on student choice and ranking within the year group; with projects starting in
the January of their final year. The assessments for all project types are similar. Students are
required to write a 25-30-page dissertation and deliver an oral presentation. Students undertaking
critical review projects also have to submit a 5-page grant proposal linked to their review. In
addition there is a supervisor allocated ‘productivity’ mark.
 Individual laboratory projects
Students undertake an individual programme of research in the laboratory of their project
supervisor, often contributing to current research.
 Group laboratory projects
Students work collaboratively, as a team of three to four, to undertake a programme of research;
based either in their supervisor’s laboratory or in the teaching laboratories.
 Computer simulation projects
Students investigate the function of biological systems using established computer models (eg
human cardiac myocytes).
 Critical review projects (with linked grant proposal)
Students undertake a hypothesis-driven critical review of the literature in a specific area/topic
within the biosciences.
 Survey projects
Students undertake a public health survey under the general theme of ‘Healthy Lifestyles’.
 Science and society projects
Students undertaking science and society projects create, deliver and evaluate interactive,
curricula enhancing teaching in local primary (students aged 7-11) and secondary (students aged
13-18) schools.
 Educational development projects
Students undertaking educational development projects develop and evaluate learning resources
for use in undergraduate teaching. Working either individually or in small teams, students develop
learning resources or new teaching methods (eg using social media) to support current teaching.
Where a choice of projects is allowed, assessing them using identical assessment criteria is a common
way to ensure comparability of standards. This is the approach in the Database Professional MSc at
Sheffield Hallam University (Case study 5.15). Although this example is at Masters level the ideas are
transferable to Bachelor level dissertations.
53
Case study 5.15 Dissertation in database professional MSc by portfolio at Sheffield
Hallam University, UK
For the Database Professional MSc students may submit either a traditional report, or a portfolio
of artefacts. In order to maintain equity and transparency between the two approaches the
marking criteria are identical. In both cases they are:




knowledge of the domain (25%);
justification of the approach (25%);
description of the research and discussion of the outcomes (25%);
quality of the report and presentation of the argument (25%).
Students work one-to-one with a supervisor. They undertake some of the ‘usual’ tasks, such as
literature review and methodology, but also include other items such as design outputs, sample
working programmes (if that was one of their target outcomes), screencasts with demonstrations,
videos of users’ feedback and anything else they think might be useful to paint the picture. Often
they undertake a learning blog at the same time, which is included as an artefact so long as they
provide some reflective commentary on it. The real art is the way that they piece together the
artefacts. Typically this portfolio will be delivered as a website, allowing the inclusion of hyperlinks
to media of different types.
In contrast there are circumstances where using different forms of assessment for different types of
project are appropriate. A good example comes from the University of Central Lancashire where an
inter-disciplinary project, shared by several different programmes, is assessed differently by each
programme. Students from different disciplines are brought together to work on a common project with
a tangible, real output. In this case it was a book, ebook, film and exhibition, but this could be changed to
suit the needs of different disciplines and institutions. Although at Masters level, we believe the idea to be
transferable to undergraduate programmes (Case study 3.7).
Case study 3.7 Working in an inter-disciplinary way with communities in the UK,
Kenya and Zambia to design, produce and sell a children’s book at the University of
Central Lancashire, UK
The Letters to Africa and Pipeline Projects are an innovative way of bringing students from
different disciplines together in a practical, applied way to devise, produce and sell real products
for children, usually books, photographs and ebooks, under the banner of UCLan Publishing.
Students work with communities, including local schools, in Lancashire, Zambia and Kenya to
gather content for the output. Sales from the products partly fund the following year's projects
and partly go towards financing a secondary school education for children in the African
community of Kimana in Kenya. The project is entirely integrated into all the participating
programmes. However, the way in which it is assessed is up to the individual programme/module
tutors. For example, MA Publishing students co-ordinated the project and prepared the briefs for
all students from various disciplines. They were doing this work as part of a practical module and
were assessed through group project books and individual reflective statements. The emphasis
was put on assessing the process rather than the output. In contrast many MA Linguistic students
adopted the project as part of their dissertation work. They researched the Maasai language (Maa)
and contributed a piece about the language to the book, interviewed local African people about
the language and put together the very first Maa language glossary in print.
54
Another way to build in consistency of standards and to enhance the quality of work produced is to
formalise both formative and summative feedback. At Queens University Belfast they developed a scheme
whereby students submitted three interim progress reports for their dissertations, on each of which staff
gave written and oral feedback (Heylings and Tariq 2001). Podcasts have also been used to provide
feedback on projects (Hill 2008). Supervisors of third year Psychology student research projects at
Liverpool Hope University used the commentary on their supervisees' second year projects to give
guidance to the student on how to develop their new project (O'Siochru 2008).
Assessment criteria
Whether undertaking a traditional dissertation or a more innovative or creative kind of FYPD the
assessment criteria are similar, though the weightings are likely to vary. In some disciplines, particularly in
media and art and design subjects a distinction is made between the criteria used to assess the outcome
and the process of producing it. In these subjects students are often asked to reflect on their own
creative work in relation to assessment criteria and their adopted approach and form. Here the concern
is with assessing knowledge, understanding and ability to contextualise their work. Table 6 presents a
composite of criteria used in dissertations in geography and business.
Variation in marking is often higher for FYPD than for other pieces of work which is why double marking
is essential (Webster et al. 2001). Greater consistency can be encouraged by careful design of assessment
criteria and marking procedures that are regularly discussed within teaching teams so as to gain a shared
understanding of meanings and application, while allowing flexibility in their implementation to prevent
the criteria stifling creativity (Pathirage et al. 2007). The development and discussion of generic
assessment criteria is important here, as the earlier analogy with the Research Excellence Framework
(2012) showed. Identifying expected achievements against the assessment criteria should allow for the
differences in the degree of autonomy students have in independent, group and co-researching models of
FYPD (Hill et al. 2011). It is just as important for students to understand the assessment criteria as it is
for markers. Asking students to assess example projects or parts of projects and then discuss what they
see as the strengths and weaknesses is an effective way for them to develop an understanding of the
criteria (Rust et al. 2003).
Assessing the development of project skills
Developing project skills and gaining applied experiences are important aspects of undertaking a FYPD.
The research skills framework developed at the University of Adelaide provides a useful tool for
designing the skills expectations of FYPD (Willison and O’Regan 2007). There is evidence that its use
‘developed a variety of discipline-specific research skills and that these skills were useful for subsequent
studies and especially for employment’ (Willison 2012, 905). Evidence that well designed FYPD help
develop research skills and graduate capabilities, such as speaking, writing, group work, creative problem
solving, and inquiry comes from a study of the development of two capstone subjects in physiology at La
Trobe University in 2011 (Julien et al. 2012). Their findings are based on an analysis of student
performance and feedback scores in conjunction with staff perceptions. They found that final grades were
significantly higher in 2011 compared with final grades in the previous two years. However, they also
reported higher staff workloads from implementing the student-centred approach. Another way to
encourage students to reflect on their skills development is to build in a requirement that students keep
a project log and undertake a skills self-evaluation (Heylings and Tariq 2001).
55
Table 6 Assessment criteria for honours dissertations in the UK
Fundamentals of the dissertation
 Evidence of originality and perceptiveness.
 Clarity of aims and topic identification.
 Evidence of reading and awareness of literature.
 Quality of research design and methodology.
 Awareness of any shortcomings of design and methodology.
 Quality of data.
 Presentation, analysis, evaluation, synthesis and interpretation of data.
 Conceptual awareness and theoretical understanding.
 Sustained argument.
 Logical organisation.
 Findings and conclusions justified and contextualised in the literature.
 Where appropriate, improvements or further developments of study.
 Recommendations for the topic and research process.
Presentation
 Standard of presentation, use of English language and structure.
 Use of complex academic terminology.
 Correct use of referencing conventions.
 Coherent integration of illustrative materials.
 Clarity of communication and ideas.
Administrative
 Conduct including engagement with administrative processes.
 Assessment of risks and ethical considerations.
 Fulfilling requirements.
Independence
 Ability to work independently.
 Demonstration of personal initiative and responsibility.
 Conduct and competence during practical work.
 Cognitive, intellectual, practical and personal skills.
 Appropriate and correct use of ICT applications.
 Reflective, critically evaluating own performance and personal development.
The ‘X Factor’
 Demonstrable critical ability.
 Creative thinking.
 Flair and innovation.
Source: Based on Hill et al. (2011, 340); Hand and Clewes (2000); and Nicholson et al. (2010)
56
Practical assessment can occur by showcasing it in the work place or laboratory. The project ‘Nurturing
biochemical research skills’ at Queensland University of Technology (QUT), for example, combines
group-work, laboratory skills and practical assessment. It demonstrates that FYPD can take different
approaches to assessment (Case study 5.2). In diversifying assignments, greater opportunities are
provided which suit different student needs.
Case study 5.2 Nurturing biochemical research skills in a group laboratory-based
capstone unit at Queensland University of Technology, Australia
This final-year unit of the ordinary degree provides students with an authentic learning experience
which integrates a number of specialist biochemical procedures. Students work in teams of six to
complete a 13-week laboratory-based project to attempt to purify an enzyme. There are no
lectures or examinations. In addition to the major lab project, workshop sessions foster critical
analysis of scientific procedures and provide insights into particular aspects of successful group
work. Students improve oral and written communication through individual presentations, group
submissions and as contributors to online discussions. The unit is very well received by students
and their performance is a key indicator of potential to undertake the fourth year honours
course.
A further example from QUT, which illustrates the assessment of project skills as well as outcomes, is a
virtual law placement in which students are assessed through their submission of an application for their
preferred placement, their contribution to an online discussion, the project and an ePortfolio reflection
(Case study 2.9 in Chapter 7).
Another way to incorporate practical experience in FYPD is to engage with community organisations and
industry professionals (Chapter 5). An interesting example of how this can be assessed comes from the
Liverpool Institute for the Performing Arts where 80% of marks go to a student conference involving
industry experts and the criteria for the remaining 20% is determined by the students themselves (Case
study 1.10).
Case study 1.10 Learning from industry professionals and a student-led conference on
contemporary issues in arts management at the Liverpool Institute for the
Performing Arts, UK
Contemporary Issues in Arts Management is a final-year module where students are required to
engage with industry professionals. Students research areas of interest and present their findings
at a student conference. Throughout the module ten speakers at the top of performing arts
management talk at one session about the future of the industry. Students are required to engage
and network with the speaker and host the sessions, which includes providing research packs to
peers. Most of the assessment (80%) is via a presentation at the end of the module at an annual
Contemporary Issues in Arts Management Conference. Emphasis is placed on coherence and
strength of argument and supporting evidence, over presentation. This unique event is attended
by industry professionals and members of the public as well as our other two years of
management students. Conference reaction is tweeted by the audience, generating wide
dissemination. The external examiner commented (2008-09) that: ‘The student conference ... is
excellent professional preparation as well as a sound testing of the students’ understanding of the
industry.’ The remaining 20% of the marks are available for criteria decided by students, for
example, their interaction with guest speakers’ subject matter and enhancements to the course.
57
A further example of a final-year project, this time involving business students at Bradford, illustrates how
the development of employability skills may be assessed. The project engaged students in teams in raising
money for charities. Assessment was through a formal presentation, involving employers as well as
tutors, and documentation of the team project processes (Case study 2.12).
Case study 2.12 Charity fund raising final-year project in business and management
to enhance employability at the University of Bradford, UK
This module was designed with two broad outcomes in mind: to give students the knowledge and
expertise they needed to perform well in the graduate selection process; and to add to their CV
activities which would give them something to talk about at interview and that would stretch
them in the development of their skills. The former was delivered via classroom teaching while
the latter was the product of planning and delivering fund-raising initiatives for one of a small
number of charities. Students undertook football matches, disco nights, cake stalls, fashion shows,
and so on; and on a number of occasions, obtained corporate sponsorship to cover certain
expenses. The emphasis of the module is on the practical demonstration of skills and students are
asked to present an analysis of what they had done and why in an ‘Apprentice Boardroom’ at the
end of the module. Assessment criteria included presentation skills, their performance as a team
and performance on the task. While teams who raised larger sums of money typically did better
than those who did not, the amount of money raised was not part of the assessment. Assessment
was through a formal presentation undertaken in front of three employers as well as tutors and
team documentation (minutes of meetings, accounts, receipt from the charity involved, evidence
of communication with the charity, risk assessment of health and safety for the activities
proposed, feedback from the mentor and a two-side reflective account) submitted one week
before the presentation.
A current study based in Australia is investigating the generic and specific skills developed through
undergraduates experiencing research (Wilson 2012). The teaching research: evaluation and assessment
strategies for undergraduate research experiences (TREASURE) project seeks to improve the ability of
academic staff to design, implement and assess undergraduate research projects that extend student
understanding of the nature and processes of research, and to foster students' abilities to take part in
those processes. The key questions underpinning the research objectives of the project are: ‘can
curriculum design grounded in the nature and processes of research in the undergraduate experience of
research contribute to transformational student learning?’; and ‘does reflective writing promote this form
of learning?’. The initial stages of the project are shedding light on the development of ways of thinking
and practising in the sciences, particularly the development of critical thinking in scientific research
contexts.
In designing creative FYPD it is important to align the learning outcomes, the experience and the
assessment. A FYPD should be viewed as the pinnacle of the degree and as such it should ensure that
students have the opportunity to build on the knowledge which they have acquired in an area which
interests them. The Leeds Biosciences FYPD programme is an excellent example of good practice. It
demonstrates how students can be given a range of options, which enables them to consider what they
want to accomplish by completing a FYPD.
58
7. Supervising and advising
The supervisors has been described in the literature as subject expert; gatekeeper of academic
standards; advisor on the research literature and methodologies; the ‘midwife’ of the dissertation; director;
project manager; shape; scaffolder; supporter; editor; and promoter of student self-efficacy (based on
MacKeogh 2006, 20).
research supervision, even at undergraduate level, needs to be a learning process for both the supervisor
and the student (Rowley and Slack 2004, 180).
The function of the supervisor or advisor is complex and diverse because of the wide and varied role the
academic has in final-year projects and dissertations (FYPD). Traditionally the role of the supervisor is to
‘provide guidance, advice, instruction, encouragement, support - but the work should reflect that of the
student and not the supervisor’ (MacKeogh 2006, 20). Positive supervisory relationships can enhance
students’ potential by building their confidence and encouraging independence (Light and Cox 2001). In
addition to providing support, advice and guidance for the student, the supervisor is required to be aware
of ethical and safety concerns in relation to the research (BERA 2011; Healey, R. et al. 2013). It is vital
that they are aware of best practices and support the student through the process of gaining consent for
the research, where this is applicable. It is the supervisor’s role to assist students, through advice and
guidance, in their management of conflicts and risk. Finally, the supervisor acts as the student’s examiner providing formative and summative feedback throughout the learning process (MacKeogh 2006). This
traditional role can place huge pressures on academics when they are supporting a large number of
students, which is one of the reasons for rethinking the approach to FYPD. By changing the design of
FYPD, support for students can be delivered in a variety of ways, which may ease time pressures on
academic staff. It should also be recognised that academics supervising students undertaking FYPD need
support and advice for undertaking a role which is significantly different from other forms of teaching
(Marshall, 2009). As Day et al. (1998: 51) note ‘avoiding the twin traps of over or under supervising is
never easy’. Where undergraduate research takes place outside the curriculum recognition of the time
that supervision takes may be an issue (Hensel and Paul 2012).
Some authors make a distinction between supervision and advising, but the terms appear to be used
loosely and interchangeably. Where a distinction is made, the former is sometimes used to describe the
situation at postgraduate level and the latter at undergraduate level as, for example at University of
Plymouth (Gresty 2013). While in a work-based context the term supervision is sometimes seen as less
appropriate as it describes a hierarchical relationship, whereas advising is seen as describing a more
facilitative relationship. Hence in this situation Boud and Costley (2007, 119) argue that: ‘The conception
of the role of academics in project work needs to change from one focused on project supervision to
one of learning adviser.’ This reflects the fact that in work-based learning situations students are ‘more
likely to receive support from their work settings and have a more learner-managed role in project work’
(Boud and Costley 2007, 122-123).
59
Guides and resources
As student numbers have increased and greater emphasis has been placed on quality assurance and
enhancement, many departments have produced guides explaining what is expected from FYPD in their
programmes. Many books and guides have also been published on undertaking undergraduate research,
dissertations and capstone projects both in general (Wisker 2009) and in particular subject areas (eg
Bailey et al. 2012; Knight and Parsons 2005; Todd et al. nd). However, most of these resources take a
conventional view of what counts as a FYPD. If alternative forms of FYPD are to become widely
acceptable then the possibility to undertake them should be included in these guides and books. If the
range of alternatives is not publicised then students will default to the traditional forms of FYPD. A good
example has been written for the English Language dissertation in Case study 1.12 (Chapter 4).
A novel way of developing a user-friendly guide is to get undergraduate students to write it. This is the
approach used at the University of Newcastle where four students researched good dissertation and
research module advice practices across a large faculty (Case study 3.12).
Case study 3.12 Engaging students in investigating research support and developing
web resources at the University of Newcastle, UK
A group of students identified good practice across a large faculty in undergraduate dissertation
and research modules, and then shared the models of student support identified through a web
resource on which all students may draw. All second year students were offered the opportunity
to be part of the Research Project. Four students were selected and paid £200 for this. A
member of staff supervised the project and interns but ensured that the students were the ones
who informed the shape of the project. Students worked in pairs to identify all the relevant
modules, make initial email contact and then arrange face-to-face interviews with those staff who
were willing. This was a major task for most of them as they had never been involved in this type
of social research before. They also spoke with student representatives in each subject to gather
more student views. An emergent component from the student intern contribution was their
desire to create a set of quality standards for research module student support with both
‘essential’ elements and ‘good practice’ aspects. This will be progressed through quality
enhancement mechanisms. As intended too, development of resources for a website to assist
students in dealing with dissertation issues has identified a wide variety of engaging practices –
from playing a funny flash game to ways of finding a research topic.
Providing written guides to what is expected and examples of good practice are essential, but experience
suggests that to be effective they need to be reinforced by other means. At Brunel University they
complement the subject specific guidance by organising a Dissertation Question Time at which a panel of
undergraduate students, academic staff and an academic skills advisor answers student questions
(Danvers 2012) (Case study 3.10).
Case study 3.10 Dissertation Question Time: Supporting the dissertation project
through panel discussion at Brunel University, UK
Dissertation Question Time attempts to create an informal arena for discussion, while allowing the
input of voices from a range of subjects and perspectives. The workshop consists of a panel of
undergraduate students, academic staff and an academic skills advisor discussing questions from
students on any aspect of the dissertation process. During the workshop the student attendees
address their question to any member of the panel. The aim is to prompt open discussion and
students on the panel are particularly encouraged to lead the discussion. To encourage
60
participation students are invited to submit questions beforehand and these are distributed among
the audience. The main themes that arose from students attending the sessions involved issues
over the relationship with the supervisor, confusion over structure or format and time
management. The dissertation is seen by many as a highly individual project; meaning it can be
difficult to provide advice that students deem specific enough for their learning needs.
Consequently students can find it hard to relate the answers to their topic. However, students
can find the discussion of general research approaches from the panel reassuring and interesting.
Therefore the advice generated through the discussion is valuable in that it complements subject
specific provision but makes no attempt to replace it.
Group and peer supervision
The supervisor may take on many roles, acting as a guide, confidant, consultant and examiner (MacKeogh
2006). The advice and guidance which can be offered to students through feedback on their work and in
discussions can be pivotal in enhancing students understanding about the direction of their project.
Bloxham and Boyd (2007, 20) argue that:
The most important aspect of the assessment process in raising achievement is the provision of
feedback. Research indicates that students value feedback despite anecdotal staff views and
contrary research evidence regarding how students fail to engage with it.
There are numerous ways in which feedback can be given to students, from written feedback, to
podcasting and seminars. Students can also support each other through peer learning, sharing
experiences and offering advice. At Oxford Brookes University, for example, students who participate in
the Geoverse project receive feedback on their ideas in the form of peer learning. Those in an optional
final-year course are required to write a paper on research they have undertaken during the second year,
which is then evaluated and commented on by postgraduate students, in the manner of an academic peerreviewed paper (Case study 4.7 in Chapter 8).
Traditionally supervision occurs through one-to-one sessions, but these can be adapted, in particular to
cater for the growth in student numbers and introduction of new technologies. In designing and
developing FYPD to have a wider spectrum of possibilities, differing supervisory relationships can be built
into the course. For example, Robson (2006) used action research with a group of eight geography
dissertation students at Keele University to empower them as independent learners and peer supporters
(Case study 4.13).
Case study 4.13 Helping students to engage more effectively with the research
process in undertaking their undergraduate dissertations at Keele University, UK
Undertaking an independent research project in the form of a dissertation can be the most
challenging and rewarding part of an undergraduate student’s university experience. However,
students often suffer from lack of motivation, hesitancy and avoidance when faced with the
daunting enormity of the task and the high demands placed on them as independent learners and
problem solvers. Robson (2006) undertook a case study of her efforts as a supervisor, using
action research, to help students engage more effectively with the research process. The aim of
the study was to make effective changes to improve students’ motivation, commitment and
achievement with regard to completing a geography dissertation. It is argued that listening to
students and responding to their perceived needs is an effective way to improve supervision.
Initial findings showed students to be lonely and insecure about their dissertations and the
61
supervisor pressured by a considerable supervisory burden. Four cycles of action research were
subsequently conducted with a group of eight dissertation students during one academic year. The
research evaluated four interventions whereby the supervisor-researcher invited the students to:
 evaluate their progress;
 learn from examples of completed dissertations;
 share and support each other;
 engage in peer assessment.
Qualitative evidence demonstrates a shift from a status quo of individual supervisory meetings
between poorly motivated students and a frustrated supervisor, to highly motivated students
effectively empowered as independent self-learners and peer supporters. It is concluded that given
the right circumstances students can be facilitated to ‘do it better themselves’.
The benefits of group and peer supervision were also found by Akister et al. (2006, 1) among social work
students:
Results indicate that supervision of undergraduate students using small, supervisor-led peer
groups is an effective paradigm for dissertation supervision. Advantages of the peer-group
approach include: a much higher rate for completion on time; greater interest in their studies
maintained during the process and less ‘failure-driven’ learning. The students’ gradings suggest that
there is no detrimental effect on performance.
Rowley and Slack (2004, 180) argue that: ‘Undergraduate supervision is a highly demanding task, in which
the supervisor plays a pivotal role in supporting students towards realising their potential.’ Supervision is
traditionally viewed as the role of the academic. However, support mechanisms and structures can take
on many different forms; from one-to-one supervision, group tutorials, peer support, lectures,
workshops and employer supervision. Guidance and advice, which is the role of the supervisor, can be
obtained from peers and through work-based supervision in the guise of employers and community
workers.
Online supervision
One method, which can be utilised to great effect, is online supervision. This can support campus-based
and distance learners, peer learning and hectic student lifestyles. Students use a virtual learning
environment (VLE) to share experiences and post questions which other students may answer, leaving
the supervisor to intervene only occasionally. As students can be demanding of supervisors (Harrison and
Whalley 2006; 2008) using a VLE, such as Moodle or WebCT, as a supervisory tool can empower
students to take ownership of the learning process, though experience suggests that to persuade
students to engage the purpose and benefits for them need to be clearly articulated. At Reading
University electronic feedback has been used effectively to provide feedback and assessment for learning
in built environment dissertations (Tang 2012). VLEs may also be used to encourage students to
undertake reflection. At Queensland University of Technology law students engage online with their
workplace supervisor for a virtual research and inquiry placement (Case study 2.9).
62
Case study 2.9 Virtual law placement: Experiencing work integrated learning in
diverse law graduate employment workplaces virtually at Queensland University of
Technology, Australia
Virtual law placement provides law students with an opportunity for research and inquiry into a
diverse range of working environments that are now available to law graduates, including
international placements. Students are assessed through their submission of an application for
their preferred placement, their contribution to an online discussion forum, the project and an
ePortfolio reflection. They work as part of a team on a real-world law workplace project, for
example, an internet-based intellectual property dispute; or listing a public company; or engaging
in research about access to justice for juvenile offenders in regions of Thailand. Students apply
legal knowledge and skills to complete a real-world workplace project in a team, using online
communication technologies to enable students to be virtually, rather than physically, present at
the workplace and to engage with the other participants, including the workplace supervisor of
the virtual placement.
Supervisory relationships
Supervision is a central element of FYPD. It is vital in order to ensure that students are on the right path
and adhering to professional and ethical guidelines. However, the supervisory relationship requires a
careful balance between providing advice and guidance and allowing the student to experience their own
learning journey – including making mistakes. At the University of Chichester students are guided in
group contact sessions. The course leaders recognise that the supervision experience is a learning
process for both students and professional supervisors as a result of their FYPD programme (Case study
4.4).
Case study 4.4 Trainee teachers making change happen in their professional world at
the University of Chichester, UK
The Creativity 3 project has a simple goal: to challenge student teachers to make change happen so
they develop the skills and confidence to do the same in their first jobs. It is a 15-credit module
that gives final-year student primary teachers the chance to develop skills and confidence in
creative problem solving in their professional world. Students work in small self-selected teams of
around three to five students, addressing real-world problems over realistic timescales and, by the
end of their projects, provide genuine products for external clients. Apart from a one-hour launch
to the whole cohort, the only scheduled contact time for the module is an hour a week. These
sessions are called Muffins & Mindmaps and free coffee, tea and hot chocolate are provided, along
with muffins. Just one member of each group is required to be there, but the onus is on the
participants to communicate the content to the rest of the group. These interactive and relaxed
sessions provide chances to share news and tips with other projects, but also to focus on themes
that will help projects succeed. All groups contribute to a newsletter to share ideas and show that
the module itself is a creative, professional initiative. While tutors deliberately keep their distance,
it is still easy for them to get very excited about the changes that students bring about. For
example, one project created an adventurous and interactive curriculum and changed the
practitioner with whom the students were working beyond recognition. The students now have a
different professional philosophy, greater confidence, deeper awareness of learning and teaching
issues, and a new positive relationship with peers.
Undertaking FYPD is likely to be the largest research-based project undertaken by an undergraduate
student and that can be daunting. Light and Cox (2001, 139) comment that: ‘At undergraduate level,
63
projects are perhaps the only area where students may consciously feel they are taking risks.’ It is helpful
for both the supervisor and students to keep an agreed record of the outcome of supervisory meetings
and the targets set to be completed before the next one. Such records, as well as being good practice,
can help protect supervisors and students if any complaints are later made about the quality of the
supervision. In one study Sports Education students completed a proforma to comment on the feedback
they received from their tutor while completing the dissertation. The findings identified key issues for
practice within the dissertation supervisory relationship.
Furthermore, it was suggested by the students that this was an exercise with inherent merits for
them: encouraging reflection on the learning process and helping them identify their
responsibilities as independent learners. As a result, some students engaged more with the
tutorial system and gained more from the experience (Mills and Matthews 2009, 108).
In providing positive supervisory support throughout students should also be supported in developing
their graduate attributes including gaining skills in research and inquiry, reflection, and personal and
intellectual autonomy (Barrie 2004; Moon 2004). One of the broader roles of supervision, which is often
neglected, is to make explicit the longer-term benefits students may gain from the skills, attitudes and
abilities learnt while undertaking their FYPD.
A useful framework based on expectations for guiding supervisory relationships is presented in Figure 1.
If both the student and the supervisor complete it, then mismatches in expectations can be discussed
openly. It was originally developed to assist the supervision of postgraduate theses, but is easily
modifiable for FYPD. It is most appropriate for independent projects, but some of the questions may be
useful for group projects (see also Marshall 2009).
A different framework has recently been designed by Luck (2012) (Figure 2). It sets out the key questions
which students should ask about the project (plans, inputs, supervision, outcomes, and assessment) and
the key responsibilities of the supervisors (validity, risks, support, objectivity, and equality). By getting the
student(s) and supervisor to map these against each other in a matrix, or ‘wireframe’ as Luck calls it,
helps identify which of the intersections are critical for their particular project. Figure 3 illustrates that
even within a single discipline the intersections where the wireframe bulges may vary significantly for
different kinds of project. The main value of the framework is that it facilitates a structured conversation
between students and their supervisors around key issues which may not always be brought out explicitly
and should help reduce the differences in conceptions of undergraduate research projects between
students and staff (Stefani et al. 1997). Although developed in the context of dissertations in biosciences,
the framework could easily be modified to reflect different questions and responsibilities relevant to
other discipline contexts.
‘Providing a balance between student autonomy and staff support is challenging but essential’ (Hill et al.
2011, 337). In projects where students are working alongside academics and postgraduates, for example
in a research group, supervisory relationships are rather different from undertaking a conventional
dissertation. Students are then acting as co-researchers, in the form of apprentices. In such negotiated
pedagogies there are ethical issues which should be worked through because of the unequal power
relationships (Le Heron et al. 2006).
64
In this chapter we have reviewed some of the many ways in which the supervision of FYPD can be
undertaken. As with the design of the projects themselves and how they are to be assessed, designing the
supervisory process, in whatever form, should be considered before the project starts.
Figure 1 Supervision expectations
Read each pair of statements below and then estimate your position on each. For example, with the first
statement if you believe very strongly that it is the supervisor's responsibility to select a good topic you
would put a ring round '1'. If you think that both the supervisor and student should equally be involved
you put a ring round '3' and if you think it is definitely the student's responsibility to select a topic, put a
ring round '5'.
1. It is the supervisor's responsibility to
select a project topic
2. It is the supervisor who decides which
theoretical framework or methodology
is most appropriate
3. The supervisor should develop an
appropriate programme and timetable
of research and study for the student
4. The supervisor is responsible for
ensuring that the student is introduced
to the appropriate services and
facilities of the department and
university
5. Supervisors should only accept
students when they have specific
knowledge of the student's chosen
topic
6. A warm, supportive relationship
between supervisor and student is
important for successful candidature
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
The supervisor should insist on seeing
drafts of work to ensure that the
student is on the right track
1
2
3
4
5
10. The supervisor is responsible for
decisions regarding the standard of the
project
1
2
3
4
5
7. The supervisor should insist on regular
meetings with the student
8. The supervisor should check regularly
that the student is working
consistently and on task
9.
The student is responsible for
selecting her/his own topic
Students should decide which
theoretical framework or
methodology they wish to use
The supervisor should leave the
development of the programme of
study to the student
It is the student's responsibility to
ensure that she/he has located and
accessed all relevant services and
facilities to undertake the project
Supervisors should feel free to accept
students, even if they do not have
specific knowledge of the student's
topic
A personal, supportive relationship is
inadvisable because it may obstruct
objectivity for both student and
supervisor during candidature
The student should decide when
she/he wants to meet with the
supervisor
The student should work
independently and not have to
account for how and where time is
spent
Students should submit drafts of
work only when they want
constructive criticism from the
supervisor
The student is responsible for
decisions concerning the standard of
the project
Adapted from a framework presented by Kiley and Cadman (1997)
65
Figure 2 A framework for supervisory relationships
Questions for the student to ask
PLAN: What is the project about? What strategy will we use? How will progress be monitored? Where
are the milestones?
INPUTS: What will be expected of me? What hours of work are expected? What resources are
needed? Will I be working with others? Can I contribute ideas?
SUPERVISION: Who will direct the research? Who do I turn to for advice? How often will we meet?
Will meetings be recorded?
OUTCOME: What will the result look like? What format will it take? How should I write it up? What
regulations should I follow?
ASSESSMENT: Which aspects of the work will be assessed? What are the criteria? Who will
contribute to the assessment?
Supervisor’s responsibilities
VALIDITY: Does the project have subject validity? Is there a real research question? Is it educationally
valid? Is it a route to learning? Can the student develop and flourish?
RISKS: What will success depend on? Are there threats to progress? Is educational outcome
independent of process and result? Do I have full academic responsibility?
SUPPORT: Are adequate resources available? Are any uncertain? What training is needed? What
backup is available? Can colleagues give support?
OBJECTIVITY: Is the assessment context clear? Will assessors be objective? Will ability be recognised?
What happens if things go wrong?
EQUALITY: Does the project fit with departmental norms? Do all students have equivalent
opportunities? Is project allocation fair? Will the project offer a balance of intellectual, generic and
specific skills?
Source: Luck (2012)
66
Figure 3 Examples of application of the wireframe
Example 1: Expression of genes in fetal sheep kidney when mother is on low protein diet
Characteristics
•
•
•
•
•
•
Literature review
Laboratory work
Statistical analysis
Supervised by
postdoc
Likely publication
Possible postgraduate
opportunity
Example 2: Critical review of literature on effectiveness of Echinacea as a cold remedy
Characteristics
•
•
•
•
•
•
Literature review
Evaluating clinical
trials
Critical
interpretation
Meta-analysis
Dissertation
Possible publication
Source: Luck (2012)
67
8. Celebrating and disseminating
The Dissertation Dash: Each year final-year students at the University of Sussex gather to celebrate the
handing in of the dissertations - and to cheer on others running to hand their work in on time (University
of Sussex 2011).
On January 27 [2012], the Directorate General of Higher Education (DIKTI), Ministry of National
Education, Indonesia released a new policy that made scientific publication a graduation requirement for
every undergraduate, graduate, and postgraduate student in Indonesia (Rochmyaningsih 2012).
Celebrating and disseminating the end of a final-year project and dissertation (FYPD) is an important
aspect to the overall process and provides public recognition of the student as producer role. When
students are given a chance to celebrate their achievements it is appreciated. Additionally, it can be an
opportunity for all of those who have supported the students to come together and can inspire students
in earlier years. Where potential employers are invited it provides opportunities for networking (eg Case
study 1.10 in Chapter 6). Hence it is worthwhile when designing FYPD to consider how to build in a
celebration where students can be congratulated and demonstrate their efforts and achievements. There
are aspects of the end of year degree shows, common in art and design schools, which other disciplines
might consider adapting to celebrate and disseminate the work of their students and in particular FYPD.
For example, undergraduate research conferences and publications may be appropriate ways for other
disciplines to disseminate and celebrate student work (Healey and Jenkins 2009; Walkington and Jenkins
2008).
Celebrations at the end of the project can include the class or larger audiences through showcase events
and presentations. Showcasing students’ work can challenge them to engage with multiple audiences. It
also requires students to draw on a range of skills in order to disseminate key information from their
project and provides students with the chance to ‘feel that they have been given the best opportunity to
express their ability in their discipline, but also convey something of themselves [and] what the subject
means to them’ (Light and Cox, 2001, 169). The showcase may not necessarily be assessed and can act
solely as a form of celebration at the end of a project, though unless there is the incentive of marks being
awarded some students may not participate.
The Boyer Commission (1998, 24) emphasises the importance of communication and dissemination:
Every university graduate should understand that no idea is fully formed until it can be
communicated, and that the organization required for writing and speaking is part of the thought
process that enables one to understand material fully. Dissemination of results is an essential and
integral part of the research process, which means that training in research cannot be considered
complete without training in effective communication.
Going public with the students’ work is one of the simplest ways to raise the standard of the work
produced, because when they know their peers, friends, relations, academics, professionals and
community members may see their work they are more likely to put in the effort to produce their best
work. Oral as well as written communication is critical. In the Gemstone project at Maryland student
teams have 30 minutes to present findings to an audience including a group of discussants at a thesis
68
conference before answering questions for 30 minutes (Case study 5.19 in Chapter 4). They have a
rehearsal six to eight weeks before the conference. At some institutions the celebration of
undergraduate research is such a part of the culture of the institution that they invite students who are
applying to the university to come along with their parents to meet the presenters and see what kind of
work they might be engaged in, should they come to the institution (Case study 3.13).
Case study 3.13 Undergraduate research celebration days in the US
Several US institutions have a special day, days or even a whole week in which students from
across the institution present their research – generally by posters but also through talks,
exhibitions or performances. These are often accompanied by talks from leading researchers in
that institution or nationally. Audiences for such events are faculty, fellow students; and in some
cases, eg Boston University and Bates College, the dates for such events are carefully selected to
ensure parents, potential students, alumni and potential sponsors can attend (Huggins et al. 2007).
In 2012 the University of New Hampshire celebrated its 13th undergraduate research conference;
over 1100 students participated over ten days.
A variant on the research conference could be to adapt for FYPD students the Three Minute Thesis
competition which was originally devised by the University of Queensland for research students and is
now a Trans-Tasman competition; it has also been adopted by a number of institutions around the world
(University of Queensland 2012). In the original version graduate students had three minutes to tell a
general audience about their research and how it’s going to change the world. They are allowed only one
PowerPoint slide. A similar structure could be used within departments and across faculties and
institutions for FYPD. Another way of disseminating the findings of FYPD more broadly is to ask students
to submit a 30-60 second video explaining their FYPD to a general audience (Flaherty 2013).
FYPD are about enhancing students’ understanding, knowledge and skills. Too often the potential to
celebrate the outcomes of the students’ hard work and dedication to their FYPD and to disseminate
their findings to a wider audience are missed. Spronken-Smith et al. (2013) have developed a useful
research dissemination framework, which complements Willison and O’Reegan’s (2007) research skills
development framework. They map a range of examples of undergraduate research and inquiry
dissemination against a matrix of exposure of the work (from module to international level) and level of
autonomy (from teacher directed to student directed).
Some students have the opportunity to disseminate their findings at national undergraduate research
conferences. The National Conference on Undergraduate Research in the US regularly hosts 2,000
students and their faculty mentors, while recently founded conferences in Britain (British Conference of
Undergraduate Research) and Australia (Australian Conference of Undergraduate Research) are
attracting over 200 delegates each (Brew 2012; Hampton-Reeves 2012). Their activities are beginning to
be noticed by higher education policy makers. There is a regular ‘Posters on the Hill’ event in
Washington DC. The first ‘Posters in Parliament’ celebration took place in London in January 2013 and a
similar event is planned in Canberra, Australia.
Celebration and dissemination case studies
The following four case studies explore how opportunities for celebration and dissemination can be
incorporated into FYPD; thereby providing a platform for students to enhance their communication skills
or simply rejoice at completing the project. The first case study, ‘Geoverse’, gives students an
69
opportunity to publish their own work in an academic journal and demonstrates how students may
collaborate to gain publishing experience (Case study 4.7).
Case study 4.7 Geoverse: A national journal for undergraduate research in geography
at Oxford Brookes and three other universities, UK
Geoverse is a national undergraduate research journal for Geography which has been piloted in
four institutions. The geography departments at Oxford Brookes University (the lead institution),
Queen Mary, University of London, the University of Gloucestershire, and University of Reading
comprise the editorial board of the journal. Geoverse publishes student-led original research based
on theoretically considered and empirically-based investigations undertaken at undergraduate
level. The aim is to motivate and reward students for innovative research practice, and give them
support through the review process before disseminating their work by publishing it. Papers are
reviewed by a panel of postgraduate students.
Students at Oxford Brookes undertake a compulsory second year module called Geography in the
Field where they go on a field trip and work in groups to collect data. An optional third-year
honours module enables students to write up their research as a paper with supervisory support
from a tutor. This resulted in many students becoming authors of research papers but in a
supervised manner. This helps fill a gap in the research cycle for undergraduate students because
they did not get the same kind of constructive, meaningful and useful feedback that an academic
would get from going to conferences, putting papers in, and getting feedback from peer reviewers.
In this module students get dialogic feed-forward on their work and they are provided with an
opportunity to disseminate their research through organising undergraduate conferences as well
as the opportunity to publish in Geoverse.
The work has also impacted on the work of colleagues in other institutions and transformed their
curricula. Colleagues at the University of Reading have replaced an examination with writing a
journal article for Geoverse. The University of Gloucestershire has developed an assignment for
which students write a collaborative journal article. At Queen Mary, University of London they
have an expedition to Iceland. Students are given the opportunity to produce a research paper for
Geoverse on their return.
The second case study, at the College of Wooster, involves an Independent Study (IS) programme and
demonstrates how the whole institution can come together to celebrate. There is an academic element,
with students showcasing and presenting their work to peers, academics, family and community
members, but also a sense of fun in their celebrations on ‘IS Monday’, the hand-in deadline for all projects
(Case study 3.9).
Case Study 3.9 Independent Study programme at the College of Wooster, US
Independent Study (IS) is a year-long project conducted by all senior students and is an integral
part of the Wooster degree. Students are given opportunities to develop their skills, to support
them in the completion of their IS, from their first year, and are offered an opportunity to
participate in Wooster's Summer Research Program, which acts as an apprenticeship. The IS
programme allows students to demonstrate skills and abilities that employers value. It is an
individually-designed study completed in collaboration with a mentor. IS can culminate in a major
research paper, an art exhibit or a performance. Students are required to conduct a literature
review and plan and carry out research in an appropriate environment (ie lab, theatre, or studio).
70
At the end of their project students make an oral presentation to defend their research. There
are also opportunities for celebration. There is the hand-in deadline, IS Monday, which ends with
an IS parade. The Senior Research Symposium, a celebration of IS, enables students, staff, peers,
parents and community members to celebrate the accomplishments of students in their senior
year. It is a day where student classes are cancelled and they stage presentations and art
exhibitions to demonstrate their knowledge and achievements.
In the third case study, at a small private university in Alaska, all students give an oral presentation of the
findings of their senior project to the university community (Case study 3.14). In larger universities this
might be more appropriately done at programme or departmental levels and spoken presentations might
be replaced by posters.
Case study 3.14 Final-year project presentation at Alaska Pacific University, US
All students across the disciplines undertake a senior project and present it to the campus
community on designated days at the end of each semester. Thus students experience both the
process of researching and also communicating findings in spoken presentations. The institution
has a strong commitment to active and research-based learning and they now market themselves
as ‘The University of Active Learning’. They have a strong year one orientation to active learning
and a range of required courses in all years involving research techniques and projects which lead
into the required final-year senior project. There is a strong applied focus. As well as a formal
research paper, students in discipline groups (mainly Environmental Sciences, Human Services, and
Business) present their research as a professional public presentation. The presentations are
advertised to faculty, staff and students, as well as interested members of the public. Other classes
are cancelled so that the student body can attend. Often those researched attend. The final
assessment is a 40-60 page research paper, the quality of the presentation including handling of
questions. While numbers of graduating students are small (c70 per year) the idea of a public
presentation as part of the final-year project could be adapted by larger departments and
institutions.
In the final illustrative case study, resources selected students at Ball State University work on an
immersive inter disciplinary project with a member of faculty; this requires them to create a product,
such as a DVD, which will engage the public in conversation. One project, on the State of Sexual Assault,
won an Emmy Award (Case study 3.5).
Case Study 3.5 Changing institutional and undergraduate perspectives and
approaches to education: The state of sexual assault undergraduate project at Ball
State University, US
Ball State University promotes immersive learning: an inter-disciplinary concept which combines
content, skills, societal need, and students’ interests into a transformative learning experience.
Each year, four Ball State University faculty members are chosen to lead teams of 15 students in
inter-disciplinary, immersive seminars. The students are chosen by application or audition.
Working together with a community sponsor, each group of faculty and students creates a
product to engage the community in public dialogue. To demonstrate how the Virginia B. Ball
Centre for Creative Inquiry supports academics, students and community groups, the State of
Sexual Assault project is presented as an illustrative example.
71
Students immersed themselves in a project which took a victim-centred perspective of the sexual
assault casework process. The seminar then produced a short documentary, State of Assault,
addressing current issues around DNA processing, laboratory technologies and evidence
collection protocols. The project linked directly with Madison County Sexual Assault Treatment
Centre, Indianapolis-Marion County Forensic Services Agency, and other regional support bodies
to address the needs and rights of sexual assault victims. The inter-disciplinary seminar culminated
in a marketable DVD documentary with interviews and hands-on activities outlining the evolving
needs and trends in sexual assault case management. State of Assault won an Emmy Award in
2009 in the editing/story category. It has been shown in several local, regional, and national
venues.
72
9. Conclusions and recommendations
Academic disciplines should be free to choose what is appropriate to measure independent, advanced
learning for their students … having a uniform approach to demonstration of honours-level achievement is
arbitrary (Huggins et al. 2005).
Final-year projects and dissertations (FYPD) are a topic of international interest, whether we are
discussing the honours dissertation in the UK, capstone projects in North America and Australasia, or
undergraduate projects to conclude Bachelor degree courses in Europe to meet the needs of the Bologna
Accords. However, there is increasing pressure to rethink the form of the traditional FYPD in response
to the growth in student numbers and diversity of motivations to study, the expansion of professional
degrees, lack of relevance to some courses and future careers, and the reduction in the numbers of
staff/faculty to supervise projects. This book has sought to identify innovative and creative solutions for
developing FYPD to meet the requirements of students from different backgrounds, aspirations,
disciplines and kinds of institution in the context of diminishing resources in many countries in the 21st
century. As Hill et al. (2011, 344) conclude: ‘Ideally a final-year research project should inspire and
challenge a student to think in new ways, to apply their expertise to explore and solve problems, and to
share that thinking and new experience with peers.’ Moreover our argument is that the key challenge for
each programme is to think creatively about the variety of ways in which FYPD may reflect the defining
characteristics of higher education and give some choices, but still be sensitive to the nature of individual
subjects and the culture of the department and institution in which the programme is taught.
Conclusions
We can summarise the key conclusions derived from earlier chapters in this publication in the following
12 points:
1. Final-year projects and dissertations (FYPD) are an example of a wider set of activities in
which students are producers of knowledge and not just consumers. A wide range of different
kinds of FYPD exist; these are reflected in the 70+ case studies listed in Appendix 1 and are
summarised in the dimensions of FYPD (Table 2 in Chapter 2) and alternative possibilities for
dissertations (Table 4 in Chapter 3).
2. The traditional dissertation is rightly valued in terms of the range of beneficial impacts it has
for student learning; it can result in transformative learning experiences for many students.
However, not all students and staff find it a suitable or beneficial experience. Diversifying the
range of forms of FYPD and the way they are assessed can meet the needs and aspirations of a
wider range of students, particularly those completing professional degrees and those seeking
employment outside academia.
3. Although we have emphasised FYPD which are relatively innovative in their context it is
important to note that they share a common set of features. The key characteristics of FYPD
are given in Chapter 3.
4. The wide range of skills acquired through the many forms of FYPD that we encountered
suggests significant benefits can be made regarding student employability. These skills support
73
students’ development by encouraging them to become empowered, confident and capable
learners.
5. Although we found a wide range of different approaches in terms of the design of the projects,
the way they are undertaken and assessed, and the form of the outputs, it is somewhat
surprising to find, the relatively limited choice that students appear to be given. In less than
20% of the case studies we collected is there an explicit element of choice. Despite all the
innovative ideas we encountered, it appears that most programmes continue to operate a
one-size-fits-all policy to those taking their FYPD. However, as we have seen in the case
studies which include an element of choice about the type of project or the form of
assessment, it is relatively easy to include this in the design, while recognising that different
kinds of choices are appropriate in different disciplines, institutions and countries.
6. For students to produce high quality FYPD it is essential that preparation starts early in the
programme, ideally from the first year onwards (Chapter 4).
7. Students in several disciplines have benefited from FYPD which have involved links with
community groups or employers; these real-world learning experiences provide an excellent
way for students to develop graduate attributes which prepare them for life after university
(Chapter 5).
8. Diversifying the form of assessment of FYPD can increase the interest and ownership of
students in the process. This can be encouraging students to showcase their work in a variety
of ways, including undergraduate conferences, end-of-year shows, presentations to colleagues,
academics and professionals, the production of documentaries and consultancy reports, as
well as, or in some cases instead of, writing theses. Integrating self and peer assessment into
the design of FYPD and explicitly assessing the development of project skills may also be
beneficial to student learning (Chapter 6).
9. Where choices in the nature of the project and the way it is assessed are introduced it is
essential that standards are comparable. The most straightforward way to ensure this is to use
similar, or in some cases identical, assessment criteria and to provide clear marking guidance
so that a common understanding of their meaning and application is shared among the
markers (Chapter 6).
10. Supervising FYPD can consume considerable staff/faculty time and energy. Providing
information in the form of guides and question and answer sessions, using group supervisions,
and facilitating ways for students to support each other can reduce the staff time required.
Focused discussions between supervisors and students and greater consistency can be
encouraged through the use of tools, such as the student expectations framework (Figure 1 in
Chapter 7).
11. Although some of the best dissertations may be placed in the library, in most disciplines few
people see FYPD other than the students who undertake them and the academics who assess
them. Yet making work public is one of the simplest ways of raising the quality of work and
acknowledging the amount of effort put into it. We have something to learn from the end-ofdegree shows common in art and design schools. At some universities the celebration of
74
undergraduate research is such a part of the culture of the institution that they invite
applicants to the institution to come along with parents and supporters to meet the student
presenters and see the kind of work they might be engaged in, should they come to the
university (Chapter 8).
12. Much attention in this project has been given to collecting case studies of FYPD from a wide
range of disciplines, differing institutions and countries. The experience of the events,
workshops and conferences at which we have presented has shown how effective these are to
challenging academics to think beyond the current ways that they undertake FYPD.
What next?
This book has focused on developing a conceptual understanding of the nature of FYPD and analysing and
celebrating, through the collection of a large number of case studies from around the world, the diverse
forms they may take. This has led to practical guidance on how to design FYPDs and to develop
supportive policies to ensure that innovative ideas are put into practice. There are important research
and development agendas, which can build on this enhanced understanding and interest. On the research
side, there are wide gaps in our knowledge and understanding of both the experience of staff/faculty who
redesign or offer alternative FYPD and their students’ experiences in undertaking them. Such studies
would complement those undertaken of staff and student perceptions of the traditional honours
dissertation (eg Malcolm 2012; Stefani et al. 1997). On the development side, the growing interest in the
sector in students as change agents provides opportunities for staff and students to co-design FYPD and
co-research into their impacts (Healey 2012).
Recommendations
The following recommendations arise from this book:
 Encouragement and support of academic staff and institutions to create distinctive FYPD opportunities
is more likely to be successful than prescription. In the conferences and workshops where we have
discussed the findings of this project we have repeatedly found that adapting practices to local
conditions was more important than adopting off-the-shelf practice. Institutional context is vital
for the success of new FYPD initiatives. Progress towards greater opportunity for active
learning and self-direction within FYPD can only be achieved through knowledge and guidance,
which this project has sought to address, and by investment in the future of the higher
education student experience.
 Giving students a choice in the form and assessment of FYPD will help to meet the varied needs of the
student body studying in higher education. This is likely to motivate a wider range of students than
the one-size-fits-all approach, which characterises most FYPD, and hence increases the
probability that more students will experience transformational learning. For many students the
FYPD is a capstone experience, but for others it is the fulcrum on which their degree rests and
an entry into postgraduate study or transition into professional life. Designing FYPD which
allow for varied purposes and motivations is a major challenge for higher education.
 Institutional quality assurance and ethical procedures need to be appropriate to allow a range
of FYPD to flourish. To minimise additional validation requirements the easiest way to allow
choice is to have several different versions of FYPD under the same module code. The
examples we have uncovered during the project all meet the same learning outcomes and are
75
assessed similarly, though the weightings given to different components may vary. By having the
choice within a module means that it is easier to modify the details of existing modules than
having to validate a new one. As for ethical clearance, clearly approval is required where, for
example, FYPD involve human subjects. However, some institutions appear to be taking the
risk-averse culture to extremes and operate a blanket ban of undergraduates contacting people
and organisations outside the university. This prevents their students undertaking many
relevant topics and gaining skills, such as undertaking interviews and questionnaires, and puts
their students at a disadvantage both in what they learn and in applying for graduate school or
employment, compared with students studying at other universities who have less draconian
policies.
 A variety of strategies is desirable to address the issue of reduced staff/faculty resources to
supervise FYPD. The key approach is better preparation in earlier years of the programme so
that the students develop the skills of designing and executing research and inquiry projects
and hence require less staff supervision when it comes to FYPD (Chapter 4). Thus the FYPD is
integrated holistically into the degree programme. Greater use of group supervision and peer
support (Chapter 7) should also take pressure off staff. In some cases group rather than
individual projects may be an alternative. In such cases designing effective ways of redistributing
marks to recognise differences in the quality of contributions from individual team members
may be necessary to persuade students that their efforts are rewarded and that they are not
carrying passengers (Chapter 6).
 FYPD guides should include both a list of essential features that need to be part of any project or
dissertation, as well as an open-ended list of possible shapes and forms they can take so long as the
essential features are present. This should encourage students to be more creative and to
experiment with new forms of FYPD if they would like to go beyond the ‘standard’ 8-12,000
word written thesis.
 For future research there is a fruitful area to explore in terms of the experience of staff in rethinking
their FYPD and introducing them into the curriculum and the experience of their students in taking
them. This project has identified many positive comments from staff about usefulness of the
case studies. Now what are required are more systematic studies to explore further the
desirability of involving students both as co-designers of FYPD and co-researchers into their
impacts.
76
References
Allan, C. (2011) Exploring the experience of ten Australian Honours students. Higher Education Research
& Development. 30 (4), pp. 421-433.
Ambrosio, C. and Jackson, C.M. (2011) Building on the 'directed community' model: Projects and
prospects. Discourse: Learning and Teaching in Philosophical and Religious Studies. 10 (3). Available from:
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/journals/detail/discourse/volume10-3 [8 January 2013].
AAC&U (American Association of Colleges and Universities) (2010) Raising the bar: Employers’ views on
college learning in the wake of economic downturn. Available from:
http://www.aacu.org/leap/documents/2009_EmployerSurvey.pdf [20 February 2013].
Ahmad, A. (2013) Personal communication.
Akister, J., Williams, I. and Maynard, A. (2006) Innovations in the supervision of social work
undergraduate dissertations: Group and individual supervision. Paper presented to HE Academy
Annual Conference, July. Available from:
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/events/archive/web0402_innovations_inthe_supervisio
n_of_social_work_undergrad_dissertations.pdf [8 January 2013].
Bailey, J., van Acker, E. and Fyffe, J. (2012) Capstone subjects in undergraduate business degrees: A good
practice guide. Brisbane: Griffith Business School. Available from: http://businesscapstones.edu.au/wpcontent/uploads/2013/01/GoodPracticeGuide.pdf [16 January 2013].
Bakan, J. (2009) The Corporation: The pathological pursuit of profit and power. London: Robinson Publishing.
Barnett, R. (2000) Supercomplexity and the curriculum. Studies in Higher Education. 25 (3), pp. 255-265.
Barnett, R. (2004) Learning for an unknown future. Higher Education Research & Development. 23 (3), pp.
247-260.
Barrie, S.C. (2004) A research-based approach to generic graduate attributes policy. Higher Education &
Research Development. 23 (3), pp. 261-275.
Baxter Magolda, M.B. (2006) Intellectual development in the college years. Change. 38 (3), pp. 50-54.
Baxter Magolda, M.B. (2009) Educating for self-authorship: Learning partnerships to achieve complex
outcomes. In Kreber, C. (Ed.) Teaching and learning within and beyond disciplinary boundaries (pp.143156). Abingdon: Routledge.
Beckman, M. and Hensel, N. (2009) Making explicit the implicit: defining undergraduate research. Council
on Undergraduate Research Quarterly. 29 (4), pp. 40-44.
BERA (British Educational Research Association) (2011) Ethical guidelines for educational research. London:
BERA. Available from: http://bera.dialsolutions.net/system/files/3/BERA-Ethical-Guidelines-2011.pdf [8
February 2013].
Bergman, J. and Sams, A. (2012) Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Eugene,
Oregon: International Society for Technology in Education.
Berrett, D. (2013) 'Capstones' build academic skills but are no cure-all, study finds. The Chronicle of Higher
Education. 24 January.
Biggs, J.B. and Tang, C. (2011) Teaching for quality learning at university. 4th ed. Maidenhead: Open
University Press.
Bloxham, S. and Boyd, P. (2007) Developing effective assessment in higher education: a practical guide.
Maidenhead: Open University Press.
Booth, C. and Harrington, J. (2003) Research methods modules and undergraduate business research: an
investigation. International Journal of Management Education. 3 (3), pp. 9-31.
77
Bolden, R., Connor, H., Duquemin, A., Hirsh, W. and Petrov, G. (2009) Employer engagement with higher
education: defining, sustaining and supporting higher skills provision. A Higher Skills Research Report for
HERDA South West & HEFCE. Exeter: HERDA SW.
Boud, D. and Costley, C. (2007) From project supervision to advising: New conceptions of the practice.
Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 44 (2), pp. 119-130.
Boud, D., Cohen, R. and Sampson, J. (1999) Peer learning and assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education. 24 (4), pp. 413-426.
Boyer, E.L. (1996) The scholarship of engagement. Journal of Public Service and Outreach. 1 (1), pp. 11-20.
Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University (1998) Reinventing
undergraduate education: A blueprint for America's research universities. Stony Brook: State University of
New York at Stony Brook. Available from:
http://www.umass.edu/research/system/files/boyer_fromRussell.pdf [9 January 2013].
Braxton, J.M., Luckey, W. and Helland, P. (2002) Insitutionalizing a broader view of scholarship through Boyer’s
four domains. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report. 29 (2). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brew, A. (2006) Research and teaching: Beyond the divide. London: PalgraveMacmillan.
Brew, A. (2007) Research and teaching from the students’ perspective. International policies and practices
for academic enquiry: An international colloquium. Marwell Conference Centre, Winchester, UK, 19–21
April.
Brew, A. (2012) First Australasian Conference of Undergraduate Research (ACUR) a success. CUR
Quarterly on the Web. 33 (2). Available from: http://www.cur.org/assets/1/23/332BrewWeb.pdf [20
February 2013].
Brewis, G., Russell, J. and Holdsworth, C. (2010) Bursting the bubble: Students, volunteering and the
community. Full report. Bristol: National Coordinating Centre for Public Engagement. Available from:
https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/sites/default/files/NCCPE_Bursting%20the%20Bubble_FullReport.
pdf [15 January 2013].
Brown, S. and the Assimilate project team (2012) A compendium of examples of innovative assessment at
Masters level. Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan University.
Burack, C., Prentice, M., and Robinson, G. (2010) Assessing service learning outcomes for students and
partners. In: International Association for Research on Service-Learning and Community Engagement. 10th
Annual Conference: Indianapolis. 28-30 October.
Centre for Active Learning (2010) Final self-evaluation report. Available from:
http://insight.glos.ac.uk/tli/activities/activelearning/Documents/CeAL%20Selfevaluation%20Document.pdf [10 February 2013].
Chang, H. (2005) Turning an undergraduate class into a professional research community. Teaching in
Higher Education. 10 (3), pp. 387-394.
Chang, H. (2007) Enrich yourself, and the world. Times Higher Education. 30 November. Available from:
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/features/enrich-yourself-and-the-world/311334.article [25
January 2013].
Chang, H. and Jackson, C. (2007) An element of controversy: The life of chlorine in science, medicine, technology
and war. London: British Society for the History of Science.
Childs P., Healey M., Lynch K., Mason O’Connor K., McEwen L. and Short C. (2010) Leading, promoting
and supporting undergraduate research in new universities. Final report to HE Academy.
Claflin University (2012) Undergraduate capstone project guidelines. Available from:
http://www.claflin.edu/docs/academics/undergraduate-capstone-guidelines-2012.pdf?sfvrsn=0 [25
January 2013].
Clouder, L. (2009) ‘Being responsible’: Students’ perspectives on trust, risk and work-based learning.
Teaching in Higher Education. 14 (3), pp. 289-301.
78
COBALT (1999) Report of survey of practice in community-based learning. Liverpool: University of Liverpool.
Colbeck, C.L. and Michael, P.W. (2006) Public scholarship: Resynthesizing Boyer’s four domains. In:
Braxton J. M. (Ed.) Delving further into Boyer’s research on scholarship. New Directions for Institutional
Research. 129. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Concordia University (2012) Recognizing student achievement in engineering. Available from:
http://www.concordia.ca/now/campus-beat/concordia-community/20120501/recognizing-studentachievement-in-engineering.php [27 February 2013].
Conference of European Ministers Responsible for Higher Education (2009) The Bologna Process 2020 The European Higher Education Area in the new decade. Communiqué from meeting in Leuven and
Louvain-la-Neuve, 28-29 April. Available from:
http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/conference/documents/leuven_louvain-laneuve_communiqu%C3%A9_april_2009.pdf [25 January 2013].
Contis, E., Stacey, K., and Petrescu, C. (2010) Increasing retention of STEM students. In: International
Association for Research on Service-Learning and Community Engagement 10th Annual Conference:
Indianapolis 28-30 October.
Danvers, E. (2012) Dissertation question time: Supporting the dissertation project through panel
discussion. Journal of Learning in Higher Education. 4. Available from:
http://www.aldinhe.ac.uk/ojs/index.php?journal=jldhe&page=article&op=view&path%5B%5D=87&path%
5B%5D=97 [25 January 2013].
Day, K., Grant, R. and Hounsell, D. (1998) Reviewing your teaching. Edinburgh and Sheffield: University of
Edinburgh, Teaching Learning and Assessment Centre/CVCP Universities' and Colleges' Staff
Development Agency.
Deeley, S. (2010) Service-learning: Thinking outside the box. Active Learning in Higher Education. 11 (1), 4353.
DeLind, L. and Link, T. (2004) Place as the nexus of a sustainable future: A course for all of us. In: Barlett,
P.F. and Chase, G.W. (Eds.) Sustainability on campus: stories and strategies for change (pp. 121-137).
Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Derounian, J. (2007) Graduate contribution to teaching and learning: A case study in sustainable process
and content. In: Roberts, C. and Roberts, J. (Eds.) Greener by degrees: Exploring sustainability through
higher education curricula (pp. 186-194). Cheltenham: Geography Discipline Network, University of
Gloucestershire. Available from:
http://insight.glos.ac.uk/tli/resources/toolkit/resources/Documents/B3.pdf [15 January 2013].
Derounian, J. (2011) Shall we dance? The importance of staff-student relationships to the pursuit of
undergraduate dissertations. Active Learning. 12 (2), pp. 91-100.
Durel, R. (1993) The capstone course: A rite of passage. Teaching Sociology. 21 (3), pp. 223–225.
Durham University (nd) Principles for the development of the taught curriculum. In: Learning and teaching
handbook. Available from: https://www.dur.ac.uk/learningandteaching.handbook/3/principles/ [12
January 2013].
Elton, L. (2000) Matching teaching methods to learning processes: dangers of doing the wrong thing
righter. In: Learning from experience and the experience of learning. 2nd Annual Conference of the
Learning in Law Initiative, University of Warwick, 7 January.
Elton, L. (2005) Scholarship and the research and teaching nexus. In: Barnett, R. (Ed.) Reshaping the
university: New relationships between research, scholarship and teaching. (pp. 108-118). Maidenhead:
McGraw-Hill/Open University Press.
Eurydice (2012) The European Higher Education Area in 2012: Bologna Process implementation report.
Brussels: Eurydice. Available from:
http://www.bmwf.gv.at/fileadmin/user_upload/europa/bologna/ministerinnenkonferenz/The_European_
79
Higher_Education_Area_in_2012-Bologna_Process_Implementation_Report_FINAL.pdf [25 January
2013].
Eyler, J. and Giles, D.E. (1999) Where’s the learning in service learning? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Flaherty, C. (2013) Snapshot dissertation. Inside Higher Ed. 22 February. Available from:
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/02/22/duke-proposes-mandatory-short-video-pitchaccompany-dissertations [1 March 2013].
Freire, P. (1998) Pedagogy of freedom: Ethic, democracy and civic courage. Lanham MD: Rowan and Littlefield.
Gibbs, G. (1988) Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. London: Further Education
Unit. Available from: www2.glos.ac.uk/gdn/publ.htm#other [14 September 2012].
Greenwood, T. (2007) Using external live projects with final year undergraduates. Practitioner Research in
Higher Education. 1, pp. 25-27 Available from:
http://194.81.189.19/ojs/index.php/prhe/article/viewFile/6/5 [14 September 2012].
Greenbank, P., Penketh, C., Schofield, M. and Turjansky T. (2008) The undergraduate dissertation: ‘Most
likely you go your way and I’ll go mine’. The International Journal for Quality and Standards. 3, Paper 22,
pp. 1-24.
Greenbank, P. and Penketh, C. (2009) Student autonomy and reflections on researching and writing the
undergraduate dissertation. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 33 (4), pp. 463-472.
Gresty, K. (2009) Enhancing final year projects: A stakeholder perspective. Final report to Biosciences Subject
Centre.
Gresty, K. (2013) Personal communication.
Gunn, V. (2010) Enhancing research-teaching linkages as a way to improve the development of
employability attributes. Discussion Paper in: Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (Scotland),
Quality Enhancement Themes Conference, Edinburgh, 2-3 March. Available from:
http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/pages/docdetail/docs/publications/enhancing-research-teachinglinkages-to-improve-the-development-of-employability-attributes [2 January 2013].
Gunn, V.A. (2011) Maintaining Scotland's research mindedness: Enhancing research-teaching linkages. Quality
Assurance Agency for Higher Education (Scotland). Available from:
http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/docs/publications/maintaining-research-mindedness-inscotland.pdf [2 January 2013].
Hampton-Reeves, S. (2012) British Conference of Undergraduate Research evolves. CUR Quarterly on the
Web. 33 (2), 10. Available from: http://www.cur.org/assets/1/23/332Hampton-ReevesWeb.pdf [20
February 2013].
Hand, L. and Clewes, D. (2000) Marking the difference: An investigation of the criteria used for assessing
undergraduate dissertations in a business school. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 25, pp. 521.
Hardwick, L. and Coffey, M. (2010) The value and impact of volunteering on voluntary community
organisations. In: Volunteering Counts: A Research Conference on Voluntary Action: Manchester. 1-2 March.
Harrison, M.E. and Whalley, W.B. (2006) Combining student independent learning and peer advice to
improve the quality of undergraduate dissertations. Planet. 16, pp. 15-17.
Harrison, M. and Whalley, W. (2008) Undertaking a dissertation from start to finish: The process and the
product. Journal of Geography in Higher Education. 32 (3), pp. 401-418.
Hart, D.A. (2012) How to start an undergraduate research journal. Washington DC: Council on Undergraduate
Research.
Healey, M. (2005a) Linking research and teaching to benefit student learning. Journal of Geography in Higher
Education. 29 (2), pp. 183-201.
80
Healey, M. (2005b) Linking research and teaching exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquirybased learning. In Barnett, R. (Ed.) Reshaping the University: New relationships between research,
scholarship and teaching. (pp. 30-42). Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill/Open University Press.
Healey, M. (2012) Students as change agents. Available from: www.mickhealey.co.uk/resources [14
September 2012].
Healey, M. (2013) Dissertations and capstone projects: A selected bibliography. Available from:
www.mickhealey.co.uk/resources [20 January 2013].
Healey, M. and Addis, M. (2004) Use of peer and self-assessment to distribute group marks among
individual team members: Ten years experience. In Healey, M. and Roberts, J. (Eds.) Engaging students
in active learning: Case studies in geography, environment and related disciplines. (pp. 116-121). Cheltenham:
University of Gloucestershire, Geography Discipline Network and School of Environment. Available
from: http://www2.glos.ac.uk/gdn/active/student.htm [28 December 2012].
Healey, M. and Jenkins, A. (2009) Developing undergraduate research and inquiry. York: HE Academy.
Available from:
www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/resources/publications/DevelopingUndergraduate_Final.
pdf [14 September 2012].
Healey M., Lannin L., Stibbe A. and Derounian J. with Bray, S., Deane, J., Hill, S., Keane J. and Simmons, C.
(2012) Rethinking final year projects and dissertations. Final report to HE Academy. York: HE Academy.
Healey, M., Jenkins, M. and Roberts, C. (2005) Researching and evaluating active and inquiry-based
learning in Geography in higher education. In: Researching and Evaluating Research-based Learning in
CETLs Symposium, C-SAP: University of Birmingham, Birmingham: 15 December. Available from:
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CDEQFjAA&url=http
%3A%2F%2Fresources.glos.ac.uk%2Fshareddata%2Fdms%2F29CDC322BCD42A03979BB63C8875C85
C.doc&ei=aeNFUYOrKKjM0AW40IAY&usg=AFQjCNGfn7x7r_9ZESRzlyXSle14KpKhfw&sig2=bFaqz7
a4O7tHMMRJb_Oplw&bvm=bv.43828540,d.d2k&cad=rja [9 February 2013].
Healey, M., Pawson, E. and Solem, M. (2010) Active learning and student engagement: International
perspectives and practices in geography in higher education. London: Routledge.
Healey, R.L., Bass. T., Caulfield, J., Hoffman, A., McGinn, K., Miller-Young, J. and Haigh, M. (2013) Being
ethically minded: Practising the scholarship of teaching and learning in an ethical manner. Teaching and
Learning Inquiry. 1 (2) forthcoming.
Heinze, A. and Heinze, B. (2009) Blended e-learning skeleton of conversation: Improving formative
assessment in undergraduate dissertation supervision. British Journal of Educational Technology. 40 (2),
pp. 294-305.
Hemmings, S. (2001) The place of the dissertation in learning to research. In Humphrey, R. and
Middleton, C. (Eds.) Learning to research: resources for learning and teaching in sociology and social policy.
Sheffield, SSP2000/ Teaching and Learning Network for Sociology and Social Policy.
Hensel, N. (Ed.) (2012) Characteristics of excellence in undergraduate research. Washington DC: Council on
Undergraduate Research. Available from: http://www.cur.org/assets/1/23/COEUR_final.pdf [9 February
2013].
Hensel, N. and Paul, E. (2012) Faculty support and undergraduate research: Innovations in faculty role definition,
workload and reward. Washington DC: Council on Undergraduate Research.
Heylings, D.J.A. and Tariq, V.N. (2001) Reflection and feedback on learning: a strategy for undergraduate
research project work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 26 (2), pp. 153-165.
Hill, J., Kneale, P., Nicholson, D., Waddington, S. and Ray, W. (2011) Reframing the geography
dissertation: A consideration of alternative, innovative and creative approaches. Journal of Geography in
Higher Education. 35 (3), pp. 331-349.
Hill, S. (2013) Personal communication.
81
Hodge, D.C., Nadler, M.K., Shore, C. and Taylor, B.A.P. (2011) Institutionalizing large-scale curricular
change: The Top 25 project at Miami University. Change. 43 (5), pp. 28-35.
Hodge, D., Pasquesi, K. and Hirsh, M. (2007) From convocation to capstone: Developing the student as
scholar. Keynote address in: Association of American Colleges and Universities Network for Academic Renewal
Conference. Long Beach, California: 19-21 April. Available from:
http://www.miami.muohio.edu/about_miami/office-of-thepresident/reports_and_speeches/pdfs/From_Convocation_to_Capstone.pdf [25 January 2013].
Holdsworth, A., Watty, K. and Davies, M. (2009) Developing capstone experiences. Centre for the Study of
Higher Education, University of Melbourne. Available from:
http://www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au/resources_teach/curriculum_design/docs/Capstone_Guide_09.pdf [9
January 2013].
Huber, M.T., Brown, C., Hutchings, P., Gale, R., Miller, R. and Breen, M. (2007) Integrative learning:
opportunities to connect. Public Report of the Integrative Learning Project sponsored by the Association
of American Colleges and Universities and The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching. Stanford, CA. Available from: http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/elibrary/integrativelearning-opportunities-connect [14 September 2012].
Huggins, R., Jenkins, A., Colley, H. and Price, M. (2005) Realising teaching and research links in course
redesign for delivery in semesters: Mission statement rhetoric, mission impossible, or mission
accomplished? Brookes E-Journal of Learning and Teaching. 1 (2). Available from:
http://bejlt.brookes.ac.uk/vol1/volume1issue2/perspective/hugginsetal_05.html [31 December 2012].
Huggins, R., Jenkins, A. and Scurry, D. (2007) Undergraduate research in selected US universities: Report on
US visit - institutional case studies. Coventry: The Reinvention Centre, University of Warwick and
Oxford Brookes. Available from:
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/sociology/research/cetl/ugresearch/ [31 December 2012].
Humboldt, W. Von (1970) On the spirit and organisational framework of intellectual institutions in Berlin.
Minerva. 8, pp. 242-267.
Jacques, D.D., Jenkins, A., Morgan, A. and Rae, J. (1981) Student and tutor experience of project work. In
Oxtoby, R. (Ed.) Higher education at the cross roads. London: Society for Research into Higher
Education.
Jenkins, A., Breen, R. and Lindsay, R. with Brew, A. (2003) Re-shaping higher education: Linking teaching and
research. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Jenkins, A., Healey, M. and Zetter, R. (2007) Linking teaching and research in departments and disciplines.
York: HE Academy. Available from: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/ourwork/research/teaching [14
September 2012].
Jones, K.W., Barrow Jr, M.V., Stephens, R.P. and O’Hara, S. (2012) Romancing the capstone: National
trends, local practice, and student motivation in the history curriculum. The Journal of American History.
98 (4), pp. 1095-1113.
Julien, B.L., Lexis, L., Schuijers, J., Samiric, T. and McDonald, S. (2012) Using capstones to develop
research skills and graduate capabilities: A case study from physiology. Journal of University Teaching &
Learning Practice. 9 (3). Available from:
http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1361&context=jutlp [6 February 2013].
Keegan, R. (2000) What ‘form’ transforms? A constructivist-developmental approach to transformational
learning. In Mezirow, J. (Ed.) Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. (pp.
35-69). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kiley, M. and Cadman, K. (1997) Supervision expectations. Adapted from work by Brown, G. and Atkins, M.
(1988) Effective teaching in higher education. (pp.146-147). London: Methuen.
82
Kiley, M., Boud, D., Manathunga, C. and Cantwell, R. (2011) Honouring the incomparable: Honours in
Australian universities. Higher Education. 62 (5), pp. 619-633.
Knight, P.G. and Parsons, T. (2005) How to do your dissertation in geography and related disciplines. 2nd
ed. London: Routledge.
Krause, K-L. (2007) Knowledge transfer, engagement and public scholarship: Emerging possibilities for an
integrated approach to academic enquiry. In: International policies and practices for academic enquiry: An
international colloquium: Marwell. Available from:
www.griffith.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/39265/KrauseMarwell2007.pdf [31 January 2013].
Kuh, G.D. (2008) High-impact educational practices: what they are, who has access to them, and why they
matter. Washington DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Kuh, G.D. (2009) What student affairs professionals need to know about student engagement. Journal of
College Student Development. 50 (6), pp. 683-670.
Lage, M.J., Platt, G.J. and Treglia, M. (2000) Inverting the classroom: A gateway to introducing an inclusive
learning environment. Journal of Economic Education. 31, 30-43. Available from:
http://muohio.academia.edu/GlennPlatt/Papers/301434/Economic_Instruction [31 January 2013].
Land, R. (2013) Undergraduate research in Scotland: An enhancement-led approach. Council on
Undergraduate Research Quarterly. 33 (3), pp. 35-40.
Lee, G., McGuiggan, R. and Holland, B. (2010) Balancing student learning and commercial outcomes in the
workplace. Higher Education Research & Development. 29 (5), pp. 561-574.
Lee, N. (2006) Design as a learning cycle: A conversational experience. Studies in Learning, Evaluation,
Innovation and Development. 3 (2), pp.12-22.
Lee, N. (2013) Personal communication.
Lee, V.S. (2012) Inquiry-guided learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning. 129. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Legge, K. (1997) Problem-orientated group project work at Roskilde University. Roskilde: Roskilde University
Press.
Le Heron, R., Baker, R. and McEwen, L. with other members of the INLT Linking Teaching and Research
Group (2006) Co-learning: Re-linking research and teaching in geography. Journal of Geography in Higher
Education. 30 (1), pp. 77-87.
Lester, S. and Costley, C. (2010) Work-based learning at higher education level: value, practice and
critique. Studies in Higher Education. 35 (5) pp. 561-575.
Light, G. and Cox, R. (2001) Learning and teaching in higher education: The reflective professional. London:
Paul Chapman Publishing.
LTEA (nd) Learning Through Enquiry Alliance. Available from: www.ltea.ac.uk/ [14 September 2012].
Luck, M. (2008) Student research projects: guidance on practice in the Biosciences. Teaching Bioscience
Enhancing Learning Series. Leeds: HE Academy Centre for Bioscience. Available from:
www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/ftp/TeachingGuides/studentresearch/studentresearch_web.pdf [14
September 2012].
Luck, M. (2012) Undergraduate research projects: A flexible wireframe for success. Poster in: International
Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Annual Conference, Hamilton, Canada: 24-27 October.
Lynch, D. (1992) An interview with David Lynch 8 March. Available from:
http://www.thecityofabsurdity.com/intpaint.html [8 January 2013].
MacKeogh, K. (2006) Supervising undergraduate research using online and peer supervision. In Huba, M.
(Ed.) Proceedings of the 7th International Virtual University Conference. Bratislava: 14-15 December.
Available from: http://doras.dcu.ie/82/ [1 August 2012].
Macquarie University (2009) Assessing final year students: Capstone units. Available from:
http://staff.mq.edu.au/teaching/curriculum_development/assessment/toolkit/ [19 January 2013].
83
Macquarie University (nd) Capstone units. Available from:
http://staff.mq.edu.au/teaching/curriculum_development/capstone_units/ [19 January 2013].
Malcolm, M. (2012) Examining the implications of learner and supervisor perceptions of undergraduate
dissertation research in business and management. Teaching in Higher Education. 17 (5), 565-576.
Marshall, S. (2009) Supervising projects and dissertations. In Fry, H., Ketteridge, S. and Marshall, S. (Eds.)
Handbook for teaching and learning in higher education. (pp.150-165). Abingdon: Routledge.
Mason O’Connor, K., McEwen, L., Owen, D., Lynch, K. and Hill, S. (2011) Literature review: Embedding
community engagement in the curriculum: An example of university-public engagement. Bristol: National
Coordinating Centre for Public Engagement NCCPE. Available from:
https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/sites/default/files/CBL%20literature%20review.pdf [14 January
2013].
Matthews, H., Healey, M. and Jones, R. (1995) Developing and assessing student skills through an
industrial training placement. In Jenkins, A. and Ward, A. (Eds.) A skill based curriculum: Case studies of
good practice. (pp. 141-150). Staff and Education Development Association Paper 98. Available from:
http://www2.glos.ac.uk/gdn/seda/matthews.htm [6 February 2013].
Mezirow, J. (1991) Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mills, C. and Matthews, N. (2009) Review of tutor feedback during undergraduate dissertations: A case
study. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education. 8 (1), pp. 108-116. Available from:
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/hlst/documents/johlste/vol8no1/PP0211Format108to116.pdf [6
February 2013].
Millwood, R., Powell, S. and Tindal, I. (2007) Undergraduate student researchers – the Ultraversity model
for work based learning. Educational cybernetics: Conference papers (peer-reviewed). Paper 1. Manchester.
Moon, J. (2004) A handbook of reflective and experiential learning: Theory and practice. London:
RoutledgeFalmer.
Moore, L. (2007) Ethical and organisational tensions for work-based learners. Journal of Workplace
Learning. 18 (3), pp. 161–172.
Nash, R. and McArdle, F. (2008) The final year and capstone experiences: Review of the literature on an
educational concept for final year students, Queensland University of Technology. Available from:
https://wiki.qut.edu.au/display/TTW/Resources [20 January 2013].
National Co-ordinating Centre for Public Engagement NCCPE (2012)
http://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/what [15 January 2013].
National Service-Learning Clearinghouse (2012) Benefits of community-based service-learning. Available
from: http://www.servicelearning.org/instant_info/fact_sheets/cb_facts/benefits-community-basedservice-learning [15 January 2013].
Neary, M. (2012) Personal communication.
Neary, M. and Hagyard, A. (2010) Pedagogy of excess: An alternative political economy of student life. In
Molesworth, M., Nixon, L. and Scullion, R. (Eds.) The marketisation of higher education and the student as
consumer. (pp. 209-223). London: Routledge. Available from:
http://studentasproducer.lincoln.ac.uk/files/2010/10/Pedagogy-of-Excess-preprint.pdf [25 January
2013].
Neary, M. with Winn, J. (2009) Student as producer: Reinventing the undergraduate curriculum. In
Neary, M., Stevenson, H. and Bell, L. (Eds.) The future of higher education: Policy, pedagogy and the student
experience. London: Continuum. (pp. 192-210). Available from:
http://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/1675/1/Future_of_HE_-_Chapter_10.pdf [15 January 2013].
Nicholson D. T., Harrison M. E. and Whalley W. B. (2010) Assessment criteria and standards of the
geography dissertation in the UK. Planet. 23, pp. 18-24.
84
O'Siochru, C. (2008) Improving feedback effectiveness. HE Academy Psychology Network Newsletter. 48, p.
4. Available from: http://www.pnarchive.org/docs/pdf/p20080609_issue48.pdf [6 February 2013].
O’Steen, B., Perry, L., Cammock, P., Kingham, S. and Pawson, E. (2011) Engaging students and learners
through service-learning. Ako Aotearoa, Wellington. Available from: http://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/akohub/good-practice-publication-grants-e-book/resources/pages/engaging-teachers-and-learners-thr-0 [25
February 2013].
Pappano, M (2012) The year of the MOOC. The New York Times Education Life. 2 November. Available
from: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-aremultiplying-at-a-rapid-pace.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 [28 February 2013].
Park, C. (2007) Redefining the doctorate. York: HE Academy. Available from:
www.lancs.ac.uk/staff/gyaccp/RedefiningTheDoctorate.pdf [14 September 2012].
PASS (Programme Assessment Strategies) (2012) The case for programme focused assessment: PASS position
paper. Available from: http://www.pass.brad.ac.uk/ [1 March 2013].
Pathirage, C.P., Haigh, R.P., Amaratunga, R.D.G. and Baldry, D. (2007) Enhancing the quality and
consistency of undergraduate dissertation assessment: A case study. The Journal of Quality Assurance in
Education. 15 (3), pp. 271-286.
Patton, S. (2013) The dissertation can no longer be defended. Chronicle in Higher Education. February 11.
Price, M. and Feehily, J. (2004) A view from the bridge: Tensions between practical and theoretical
perspectives in vocational programme development. Brookes eJournal of Learning and Teaching. 1 (1).
QAA (2011) UK Quality code for higher education. Part B: Assuring and enhancing academic quality. Chapter B6:
Assessment of students and accreditation of prior learning. Gloucester: Quality Assurance Agency for
Higher Education. Available from:
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Documents/Quality%20Code%20%20Chapter%20B6.pdf [20 February 2013].
Rammell, B. (2006) Innovations: Exploring research-based learning. Speech by Minister of Higher Education
at University of Warwick Conference, Coventry, 25 October.
Ramsden, P. (2008) Teaching and the student experience. Report presented to Department of Innovation,
Universities and Skills’ Debate on the Future of Higher Education. Available from:
www.dius.gov.uk/higher_education/shape_and_structure/he_debate/teaching_and_student_experience
.aspx [9 January 2013].
Rasul, M.G., Nouwens, F., Martin, C., Greensill, C., Singh, D., Kestell, C.D., and Hadgraft, R. (2009) Good
practice guidelines for managing, supervising and assessing final year engineering projects. In: the 20th
Australasian Association for Engineering Education Conference, University of Adelaide, Adelaide. 6-9
December
Research Excellence Framework (2012) REF 2014. Available from: http://www.ref.ac.uk/ [20 February
2013].
Rice, R.E. (2003) Rethinking scholarship and new practice: A central AAHE priority. New Directions: Special
Report 4. Washington DC: American Association for Higher Education.
Robson, E. (2006) Helping them to do it better themselves: Supervising geography dissertations. Unpublished
MA Learning and Teaching in Higher Education Dissertation, Keele University.
Rochmyaningsih, D. (2012) Indonesia makes research publication a graduation requirement for all
students AsianScientist. 9 March. Available from:
http://www.asianscientist.com/author/dynarochmyaningsih/ [1 February 2013].
Rowe, C. and Okell, E.R. (2009) The ‘Research-Teaching Nexus’ and the learning-teaching relationship.
Who’s in charge? Arts and Humanities in Higher Education. 8 (2), pp. 180-190.
85
Rowles, C., Koch, D., Hundley, S. and Hamilton, S. (2004) Towards a model for capstone experiences:
Mountaintops, magnets, and mandates. Progress, Trends and Practices in Higher Education. 16 (1), 1-2?,
pp. 13-15.
Rowley, J. and Slack, F. (2004) What is the future for undergraduate dissertations? Education and Training.
46 (4), pp. 176-181.
Rust, C., Price, M. and O’Donovan, B. (2003) Improving students’ learning by developing their
understanding of assessment criteria and processes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 28 (2),
pp. 147-164.
Ryser, L., Markey, S. and Halseth, G. (2013) Developing the next generation of community-based
researchers: Tips for undergraduate students. Journal of Geography in Higher Education. 37 (1), pp. 1127.
Schermer, T. and Gray, S. (2012) The senior capstone: Transformative experiences in the liberal arts. Final
report to Teagle Foundation. Available from:
http://www.teaglefoundation.org/teagle/media/library/documents/resources/Augustana-Final-Report.pdf
[24 January 2013].
School of History, Welsh History and Archaeology, Bangor University (2012) Guidelines for dissertations,
2012-13. Available from:
http://www.bangor.ac.uk/history/current/guidelines/documents/DissertationGuidelines2012-13.pdf [28
December 2012].
Shadforth, T. and Harvey, B. (2004) The undergraduate dissertation: Subject-centred or student-centred.
Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods. 2 (2), pp. 145-152.
Sill, D., Harward, B.M. and Cooper, I. (2009) The disorienting dilemma: The senior capstone as a
transformative experience. Liberal Education. 95 (3), pp. 50-55. Available from:
www.aacu.org/liberaleducation/le-su09/documents/LE-SU09_Sill.pdf [14 September 2012].
Spronken-Smith, R. (2005) Implementing a problem-based learning approach for teaching research
methods in geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Education. 29 (2), pp. 203-222.
Spronken-Smith, R.A., Brodeur, J.J., Kajaks, T., Luck, M., Myatt, P., Verburgh, A., Walkington, H. and
Wuetherick, B. (2013) Completing the research cycle: A framework for promoting dissemination of
undergraduate research and inquiry. Teaching and Learning Inquiry. 1 (2) forthcoming.
Stefani, L.A., Tariq, V.N., Heylings, D.J.A. and Butcher, A.C. (1997) A comparison of tutor and student
conceptions of undergraduate research project work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 22,
pp. 271–288.
Stibbe, A. (2011) Guide for the English Language dissertation. Available from:
http://insight.glos.ac.uk/tli/activities/ntf/creativehops/examples/Documents/Arran%20Stibbe%20English%
20Language%20Dissertation%20Guide.docx [18 January 2013].
Stibbe, A. (2012) Extended case study: Work-based learning in the humanities: a welcome stranger?
Available from:
http://insight.glos.ac.uk/tli/activities/ntf/creativehops/examples/ExtendedCaseStudies/Pages/HumanitiesFi
nalYearWorkBasedProjects.aspx [18 January 2013].
Stoecker, R. and Tryon, E. with Holgendorf, A. (2009) The unheard voices: Community organizations and
service learning. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education (2011) The Swedish National Agency for Higher Education’s
quality evaluation system 2011–2014. Stockholm: SNAHE. Available from:
http://www.hsv.se/download/18.328ff76512e968468bc80004249/1103R-quality-evaluation-system2011-2014.pdf [10 January 2013].
Tang, L. (2012) Engage in assessment for learning and feedback for undergraduate dissertations. In HE
Academy STEM Annual Conference, Imperial College, London 12-13 April. Available from:
86
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/stem-conference/BuiltEnvironment/Llewellyn_Tang.pdf
[18 January 2013].
Tariq, V., Stefani, L., Butcher, A. and Heylings, D. (1998) Developing a new approach to the assessment of
project work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 23 (3), pp. 221-240.
Thrift, N. (2013) A British perspective on the new modes of writing. Chronicle of Higher Education. 1
March. Available from: http://chronicle.com/blogs/worldwise/a-british-perspective-on-the-new-modesof-writing/31221?cid=pm&utm_source=pm&utm_medium=en [3 March 2013].
Till, N. (2013) Opus versus output. Times Higher Education. 7 March. Available from:
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/features/feature-opus-versus-output/2002261.article [10 March
2013].
Todd, M. et al. (nd) Guide to undergraduate dissertations in the social sciences. Available from:
http://www.socscidiss.bham.ac.uk/#resources [31 December 2012].
Todd, M., Bannister, P. and Clegg S. (2004) Independent inquiry and the undergraduate dissertation:
Perceptions and experiences of final-year social science students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher
Education. 29 (3), pp. 335-355.
Todd, R. and Magleby, S. (2005) Elements of a successful capstone course considering the needs of
stakeholders. European Journal of Engineering Education. 30, pp. 203-214.
University of Brighton (2012) Student community engagement information for community organisations
[online]. Available from:
https://www.publicengagement.ac.uk/sites/default/files/CBL%20literature%20review.pdf and
http://www.guninetwork.org/guni.hednews/guni.highlights/student-community-engagement [15 January
2013].
University of Lincoln (nd) Student as producer [online]. Available from:
http://studentasproducer.lincoln.ac.uk/ [25 January 2013].
University of Minnesota (2012) Community Service-Learning Center [online]. Available from:
http://www.servicelearning.umn.edu/info/benefits.html [15 January 2013].
University of Prince Edward Island (2008) Strategic research plan 2008-18. Charlottetown: UPEI.
University of Queensland (2012) Three Minute Thesis 3MT® [online]. Available from:
http://www.uq.edu.au/grad-school/three-minute-thesis [5 February 2013].
University of Sussex (2011) Dissertation dash 2011 [online]. Available from:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/universityofsussex/sets/72157626788000392 [31 December 2012].
University of Warwick (2010) The Reinvention Centre for Undergraduate Research [online]. Available
from http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/iatl/cetl/ [25 January 2013].
Valentin, C. (1999) Challenging the corporation: Critical perspectives on workplace learning. In: Standing
Conference for University Teaching and Research in the Education of Adults, 29th Annual Conference,
University of Warwick,Coventry, 5-7 July. Available from:
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/000001022.htm [15 January 2013].
Walkington, H. and Jenkins, A. (2008) Embedding undergraduate research publication in the student
learning experience: Ten suggested strategies. Brookes E-journal of Learning and Teaching. 2 (3).
Available from:
http://bejlt.brookes.ac.uk/article/embedding_undergraduate_research_publication_in_the_student_lear
ning_experi/ [24 January 2013].
Webb, M. (2011) Outduction: Enhancing the final year experience. Final report to HE Academy. Available
from: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/ntfs/projects/NTFS_Project_Kingston_Final.doc
[14 September 2012].
Webster, F., Pepper, D. and Jenkins, A. (2000) Assessing the undergraduate dissertation. Assessment &
Evaluation in Higher Education. 25 (1), pp. 71-80.
87
Willison, J. W. (2012) When academics integrate research skill development in the curriculum. Higher
Education Research & Development. 31 (6), pp. 905-919.
Willison, J. W. and O'Regan, K. (2007) Commonly known, commonly not known, totally unknown: A
framework for students becoming researchers. Higher Education Research & Development. 26 (4), pp.
393-409.
Wilson, A. and the TREASURE Project Team (2012) Making the development of critical thinking visible in
undergraduate research experiences. In: Society of Research into Higher Education Conference, Newport,
12-14 December.
Wisker, G. (2009) The undergraduate research handbook. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wosh, P.J., Hajo, C.M. and Katz, E. (2012) Teaching digital skills in an archives and public history
curriculum. In Hirsh, B.D. (Eds.) Digital humanities pedagogy: Practices, principles and politics. Open Book
Publishers. Available from: http://www.openbookpublishers.com/reader/161 [24 February 2013].
88
Appendix 1 - List of case studies by discipline
Space only allowed selected brief case studies to be included in the text. The full case studies of these
and other examples collected during the project and the sources on which they are based may be found
on the project website (http://insight.glos.ac.uk/tli/activities/ntf/creativehops/pages/default.aspx) in the
order given below. Recently added brief case studies are included in the FYPD handout available from:
http://www.mickhealey.co.uk/resources.
Arts, design, media and humanities examples
1.1 Giving students alternative assessment options for undertaking a product design project at
Nottingham Trent University, UK
1.2 History students contribute research findings to a website at Victoria University, Canada
1.3 Design dissertation: From practice to theory and back again at the University of Greenwich, UK
1.4 Advanced Newsweek: Work-based learning and employability skills for student journalists at the
University of Gloucestershire, UK
1.5 Community sector work placements as capstone projects at Swinburne University of
Technology, Australia
1.6 Developing authentic undergraduate research in art and design at Nottingham Trent University,
UK
1.7 An extended essay as an alternative to a dissertation in a radio production degree course at the
University of Gloucestershire, UK
1.8 Producing artefacts through collaboration in media production at the University of
Gloucestershire, UK
1.9 Final-year work-based projects in the humanities at Sheffield Hallam University, UK
1.10 Learning from industry professionals and a student-led conference on contemporary issues in arts
management at the Liverpool Institute for the Performing Arts, UK
1.11 Entertainment technology dissertation at Staffordshire University, UK
1.12 Letting the apple fall further from the tree: The creation of a guide to inform students of the
diversity of possible forms that an English language dissertation can take at the University of
Gloucestershire, UK
1.13 Exploring contemporary literature at Oxford Brookes University, UK
1.14 Music and the dissertation at Oxford Brookes University, UK
1.15 Creative exchange: Multidisciplinary media arts practice in an industry context at James Cook
University, Australia
1.16 BA (Hons) Popular Music: An alternative approach to assessment design of a research project
module at Colchester Institute, UK
1.17 Developing the reflective practitioner in performing arts at the University of Winchester, UK
1.18 Style in performance in music degree at the Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama,
UK
1.19 Engaging students in digital humanities in an archives and public history curriculum at New York
University, US
89
Business, hospitality, law, sport and tourism examples
2.1 Engaging students in applied research through a community sports development consultancy project
at the University of Central Lancashire, UK
2.2 Modelling the research experience: Tourism students’ virtual conference at the Universities of
Lincoln and Wolverhampton, UK
2.3 Students participate in a research project on criminal justice linked to staff interests at Australian
National University, Australia
2.4 International on-course market research experience for final semester Bachelor of Agribusiness
students at the University of Queensland, Australia
2.5 Events management live consultancy project, at the University of Gloucestershire, UK
2.6 Coaching and community development at Southampton Solent University, UK
2.7 Implementing a research active curriculum at the University of Sunderland, UK
2.8 Researching contemporary management issues: An alternative to the final-year project at the
University of Winchester, UK
2.9 Virtual law placement: Experiencing work integrated learning in diverse law graduate employment
workplaces virtually at Queensland University of Technology, Australia
2.10 Broadening final-year projects through use of major and minor thesis requirements at the Japan
Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Japan
2.11 Students solving real-life projects in computer science and software engineering at the University
of Sheffield, UK
2.12 Charity fund raising final-year project in business and management to enhance employability at the
University of Bradford, UK
2.13 Management practice in real-world projects at Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong
2.14 Final-year work placement: An alternative to the dissertation in events management at the
University of Winchester, UK
2.15 Language students work in teams on international market research projects at Leeds
Metropolitan University, UK
Inter-disciplinary and cross-institutional examples
3.1 Compulsory community-based learning capstone project at Portland State University, US
3.2 Unravelling complexity at Australian National University, Australia
3.3 Inter-disciplinary inquiry-based learning (IDIBL) focused on action research in the workplace at the
University of Bolton, UK
3.4 Academic credit for employability skills at the University of Gloucestershire, UK
3.5 Changing institutional and undergraduate perspectives and approaches to education: The state of
sexual assault undergraduate project at Ball State University, US
3.6 Involving students in inter-disciplinary interactive media consultancy projects at Miami University,
Ohio, US
3.7 Working inter-disciplinary with communities in the UK, Kenya and Zambia to design, produce and
sell a children’s book at the University of Central Lancashire, UK
3.8 work-based alternative to the dissertation at Masters level: Staff engaged in action research at the
University Centre Yeovil, UK
3.9 Independent study programme at the College of Wooster, US
3.10 Dissertation Question Time: Supporting the dissertation project through panel discussion at Brunel
University, UK
3.11 Engaging students through empowering them to co-create the curriculum at the University of
Newcastle, UK
90
3.12 Engaging students in investigating research support and developing web resources at the University
of Newcastle, UK
3.13 Undergraduate research celebration days in the US
3.14 Final-year project presentation at Alaska Pacific University, US
3.15 The undergraduate capstone project guidelines at Claflin University, South Carolina, US
3.16 Community-based research at Bates College, Maine, US
Education, social, environmental, and health sciences examples
4.1 Service-learning programme in Faculty of Education at Queensland University of Technology,
Australia
4.2 Giving students first-hand experience of research-based consultancy in environmental management at
the University of Queensland, Australia
4.3 Preparing and defending a consultancy report in environmental geology at Kingston University,
UK
4.4 Trainee teachers making change happen in their professional world at the University of
Chichester, UK
4.5 Students act as research consultants in joint degree in education, sport and leisure at Nottingham
Trent University, UK
4.6 Empowering communities through asset mapping and GIS, a series of senior capstone courses at
Portland State University, US
4.7 Geoverse: A national journal for undergraduate research in geography at Oxford Brookes and
three other universities, UK
4.8 Research and inquiry-based practice dissertation for undergraduate qualified nurses at the
University of Southampton, UK
4.9 Encouraging students’ critical engagement with community-based publics and issues at Birmingham
City University, UK
4.10 Geography workplace project at Staffordshire University, UK
4.11 Bachelor thesis in international co-operation and development for pre-primary and primary school
teachers at Scuola Universitaria Professionale della Svizzera Italiana, Switzerland
4.12 Final-year students undertake team research projects on local environmental issues at the
University of Gloucestershire, UK
4.13 Helping students to engage more effectively with the research process in undertaking their
undergraduate dissertations at Keele University, UK
4.14 Student poster conference linked to dissertation in psychology at St Mary’s University College,
UK
4.15 Designing a research capstone experience for pharmacy students at Southern Illinois University
Edwardsville, US
4.16 Capstone service-learning project in geography at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand
4.17 Promoting oral health in a local community at the University of Otago, NZ
Science, technology, engineering and mathematics examples
5.1 Collaborative and student-driven learning approaches to capstone units in ICT at Macquarie
University, Australia
5.2 Nurturing biochemical research skills in a group laboratory-based capstone unit at the Queensland
University of Technology, Australia
5.3 Chemistry ‘concentrated study’ project at the University of St Andrews, UK
91
5.4 Research into practice: An alternative format for final-year biosciences honours project at the
University of Plymouth, UK
5.5 The mechanical engineering final-year project at the University of Adelaide, Australia
5.6 Linking students with industry through Co-operative Education for Enterprise Development (CEED)
in four Australian Universities
5.7 Communicating maths at the University of Bath, UK
5.8 Biosciences final-year project at Durham University, UK
5.9 GIS management in industry at Curtin University, Australia
5.10 Bridging the gap between textbooks and scientific research in cell biology at University of
Utrecht, Netherlands
5.11 Integrating professional and technical competencies in a final-year capstone design course at the
University of New South Wales, Australia
5.12 Alternative final-year projects in the biosciences at the University of Leeds, UK
5.13 Students undertake paid internships as agents of change or educational researchers in biosciences at
the University of Leeds, UK
5.14 Facilitating student professional readiness through industry sponsored senior capstone projects at
Western Carolina University, US
5.15 Dissertation in database professional MSc by portfolio at Sheffield Hallam University, UK
5.16 Developing and professionally managing video-games at Utah game forge, at the University of
Utah, US
5.17 Reorganisation of labs to develop research independence in agricultural science at the University of
Tasmania, Australia
5.18 Science undergraduates build on research of previous students at University College London, UK
5.19 Across department undergraduate research programme in the College of Engineering,
Maryland, US
5.20 Students work in multi-disciplinary teams on both year-long engineering capstone projects for
corporate sponsors and two- to three-year-long entrepreneurial sustainable projects at Olin
College, US
5.21 Bioscience Horizons is an undergraduate research journal published by a mainstream publisher, UK
92
Comments by readers
Oozing with great examples; it will be a terrific resource (Rachel Spronken-Smith, Otago, New Zealand).
I found it extremely interesting and enjoyable to read, comprehensive and full of good ideas. The style of writing is
clear, accessible and readable. It will be a valuable and reliable resource for colleagues (Martin Luck,
Nottingham, UK).
It provides a wealth of information and ideas about the development of final year projects. … The wide range of
case studies - both across disciplines and from different countries - helps to demonstrate that these are not just
isolated examples of good/innovative practice, but can be a fundamental element of undergraduate education. I
particularly liked the focus on graduate attributes and the development of applied learning. I also liked the
emphasis on student involvement in the design and assessment of projects (Stephen Jackson, QAA, UK).
An excellent and timely resource (Bettie Higgs, University College Cork, Ireland).
It is a very clearly written and accessible overview of final year projects which brings together a rich variety of
examples of good practice. I've no doubt it will be an important book which will help to drive innovation across the
sector (Stuart Hampton-Reeves, University of Central Lancashire, UK).
I really like FYPD - it's grounded and sensible. Full of pragmatic examples (Stephen Hill, University of
Gloucestershire, UK).
FYPDs are Persian carpets which should be in the reach of all higher education programmes. I see FYPDs as the
academy's signature of what is meant when research marries teaching (Arshad Ahmad, Concordia University
and President of the Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Canada).
A treasure trove of conceptual thinking, reviews of the scholarly and research evidence, and shining through the
publication a wide ranging set of international case studies to enhance the practice of course teams, departments
and institutions (Alan Jenkins, Oxford Brookes University, UK).
93
Contact us
The Higher Education Academy
Innovation Way
York Science Park
Heslington
York
YO10 5BR
+44 (0)1904 717500
enquiries@heacademy.ac.uk
The HEA supports staff in higher education throughout their
careers, from those who are new to teaching through to senior
management. We offer services at a generic learning and
teaching level as well as in 28 different disciplines. Through our
partnership managers we work directly with HE providers to
understand individual circumstances and priorities, and bring
together resources to meet them. The HEA has knowledge,
experience and expertise in higher education. Our service and
product range is broader than any other competitor.
ISBN: 000-0-0000000-00-0
www.heacademy.ac.uk | www.twitter.com/heacademy
© The Higher Education Academy, 2013
The views expressed in this publication are those of the author
and not necessarily those of the Higher Education Academy. No
part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
photocopying, recording, or any storage and retrieval system
without the written permission of the Editor. Such permission
will normally be granted for educational purposes provided that
due acknowledgement is given.
The Higher Education Academy (HEA) is a national body for
learning and teaching in higher education. We work with
universities and other higher education providers to bring about
change in learning and teaching. We do this to improve the
experience that students have while they are studying, and to
support and develop those who teach them. Our activities focus
on rewarding and recognising excellence in teaching, bringing
together people and resources to research and share best
practice, and by helping to influence, shape and implement policy
- locally, nationally, and internationally.
To request copies of this report in large print or in a
different format, please contact the communications office
at the Higher Education Academy: 01904 717500 or
pressoffice@heacademy.ac.uk
94